+0
Hi,

I'm wondering if the following constructions are possible.

1. would like for+NP+infinitival

ex) I would like for him to dance to the music.

2. like for+NP+infinitival

ex) I like for him to dance to the music.

3. like+NP+infinitival

ex) I like him to dance to the music.

I can't find many constructions of these types in the BYU corpus, so they seem to be of questionable grammaticality. I'd like to get a confirmation on this from a native speaker. Thank you.
+0
Hi,

I'm wondering if the following constructions are possible.

All of these are said. But to me, the versions with 'for' are a bit sub-standard. Perhaps they may be standard in American English.

1. would like for+NP+infinitival

ex) I would like for him to dance to the music.

2. like for+NP+infinitival

ex) I like for him to dance to the music.

3. like+NP+infinitival

ex) I like him to dance to the music.

Perhaps you need to check 'a dancing corpus'. Emotion: big smileAs a dance teacher, I say this kind of thing sometimes.Emotion: dance

I can't find many constructions of these types in the BYU corpus, so they seem to be of questionable grammaticality. I'd like to get a confirmation on this from a native speaker.

Clive
Comments  
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thank you very much for the reply, Clive.

Could I ask you a few more questions?

1. Do they all carry the same meaning?

2. I would like you to meet my boyfriend vs. I would like for you to meet my boyfriend.

Yesterday I posted this question and C45 said the latter was not correct. Why is a version with 'for' not allowed in this case?
Hi,

Could I ask you a few more questions?

1. Do they all carry the same meaning? You mean apart from the fact that the 'for' verison, to me, means the speaker is not speaking very well?? Yes.

I'm assuming here that you are still focusing on the 'for' versus 'non-for' topic.

2. I would like you to meet my boyfriend vs. I would like for you to meet my boyfriend.

Yesterday I posted this question and C45 said the latter was not correct. Why is a version with 'for' not allowed in this case? I said it was'a bit sub-standard'. C45 said it was incorrect. He/she just dislikes it more strongly than I do.

If you want a reason, I'd say it's probably because I don't hear people I think of as good, educated speakers saying the 'for' version very often.

Clive
Got it! Thank you so much.Emotion: smile
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.