0

In Merriam-Webster, the third definition of "make" includes the following definitions I believe correspond to make as in "to make myself understood":

3 a : to cause to happen to or be experienced by someone [made trouble for us]
b : to cause to exist, occur, or appear : create [make a disturbance]
c : to favor the growth or occurrence of [haste makes waste]
d : to fit, intend, or destine by or as if by creating [was made to be an actor]

In addition, these definitions may fit as well:

5a: to cause to be or become [made them happy, makes it possible]
6 : to cause to act in a certain way : compel [make her give it back]

Question: Is the "Make" in "to make myself understood" referring to causing other people to understand you [by "forcing/making" them understand"], or rather causing or bringing about a state of which you are "understood".

Essentially, I think "make" could be seen also as "to cause to be or become" like "made them happy", which is recognizing merely a state change (not understood→understood) rather than referring to causing another person to understand you.

Do you make yourself understood (by others), or do you make yourself understood (into the state of understood/being understood)?

Improve this question
8
  • 3
    What difference could it possibly make one way or the other? What's your desired outcome in answering this question?
    – DW256
    Commented Aug 7 at 5:00
  • 1
    5a seems like the closest match. You're causing yourself to become understood by others.
    – Barmar
    Commented Aug 7 at 6:11
  • 1
    Put me on Team @DW256. I don’t think that very many native speakers of English would notice the distinction you’re asking about. But if what you’re most interested in is which of the two definitions constitutes a better paraphrase, I’d say it’s 5a.
    – Paul Tanenbaum
    Commented Aug 7 at 11:26
  • 1
    OK, here's the thing about idioms: M-W generally calls all sorts of idioms just idiom. They don't care if the idiom is sort of separately definable in any sort of way. Because, and here's the important part, because they don't have a pert-near idiom designation. That is just a rabbit-hole activity that bored people made up. IK, WK? YW.
    – HippoSawrUs
    Commented Aug 7 at 23:11
  • 1
    The speaker wants to explain better, not to force others to understand better.
    – Yosef Baskin
    Commented Aug 8 at 0:12

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
0

Yes; I agree that 'make myself understood' seems to have the unspecified communicatee/s as patient ('one who receives/experiences/undergoes ... the action of the verb and is somehow changed as a result) [Wikipedia; thematic relations], and this contrasts with the situations in Merriam-Webster's examples

5a: to cause to be or become [made them happy, makes it possible]

6: to cause to act in a certain way : compel [make her give it back]

where the direct object of 'make' is specified.

It's probably best analysed syntactically as a deleted form of

  • I made myself to be understood

which in the first instance has the communicator as both agent and patient, but best analysed semantically as having the addressee/s as the patient, a view licensed by the Farlex Dictionary of Idioms:

make oneself understood: to make others understand exactly what one is trying to convey

Compare the different definitions/synonyms one can find for 'make oneself heard':

make oneself heard:

assert / declare / ... / say loud and clear / ... / speak loudly [literal sense] / speak one's mind [Thesaurus.com]

[speaker-orientated]

make oneself heard:

I finally made myself heard (by management): I finally made (the bosses) listen to me [gymglish]

[addressee-orientated]

So perhaps one can add a sense:

  • compel/persuade/encourage [someone] to adopt/consider a certain [unspecified] attitude / view

but this is for the entire expression 'make oneself understood [to X]'

Improve this answer
5
  • If it were "Hunters wear day-glo orange to make themselves visible" we wouldn't say that some unspecified other hunters are the "patient". It's a reflexive construction.
    – TimR
    Commented Aug 8 at 10:50
  • Or "make themselves seen".
    – TimR
    Commented Aug 8 at 10:53
  • But you're assuming no possibility of semantic shift.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Aug 8 at 15:05
  • Farlex is describing the practical meaning in context, not the syntax.
    – TimR
    Commented Aug 8 at 15:45
  • That's what 'mean' means. When it gets to fixed phrases, trying to shoehorn polysemes into convenient classifications falls down.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Aug 8 at 16:05
1

What does "make" mean in "to make myself understood"?

to make is

  1. used as a main verb with the meaning of "to create" -> "I made a garden seat from scrap wood." "We made trouble/a noise."

  2. used in causative constructions with the meaning of "to cause" ->

I made him do his homework -> I caused him to do his homework.

We made the building secure -> We caused the building to be secure.

Your example is reflexive causative:

I made myself understood -> I caused myself to be understood.

Improve this answer
3
  • The Farlex definition implies that there has been at least a partial semantic shift to 'convincing' [the addressee]. And I agree.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Aug 8 at 15:07
  • @EdwinAshworth Farlex isn't implying any sort of semantic shift towards transitive with direct object. They could say that the phrase "to introduce onself" means "To tell someone your name" without any implication that there's been a semantic shift towards transitive with direct object or indirect object.
    – TimR
    Commented Aug 8 at 15:49
  • Crystal posits that it's more sensible to regard say 'ship of the desert' as a synonym of 'camel' when that's the intended sense. Obviously, the semantics of 'ship' isn't the same.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Aug 8 at 16:07

You must log in to answer this question.