For discussion's sake, I'll express the opinion that there is no "be to" construction (in any interesting sense of 'construction') -- specifically, I'd claim that the putative construction is wholly compositional.
(...And one of my oft-ranted about complaints about Construction Grammar nowadays is the way it debased the notion of construction by calling compositional patterns 'constructions'.)
--And,
jasper holmes, On 06/06/2007 10:11:
> I think I remember a WG treatment of these. Anybody?
>
> Jasp
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Jun 5, 2007 7:44 PM
> Subject: [Cogling-L] "he is to be home" construction
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> Hello,
> I'm wondering if anyone knows of any references to diachronic or
> synchronic analyses of the "is/was to V" construction as in "He is to
> be kept away from children." ("BE to" with a modal meaning).
>
> Thanks for any tips,
>
> Adele
>
|