It awaits you to

[emsr2d2]

I find "it awaits you to test your golfing abilities" very awkward, particularly the underlined part. I'd use:

It awaits your arrival so you can test your golfing abilities.
It awaits you, ready to test your golfing abilities.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

I find "it awaits you to test your golfing abilities" very awkward, particularly the underlined part. I'd use:

It awaits your arrival so you can test your golfing abilities.
It awaits you, ready to test your golfing abilities.

Is the following also awkward?

The world awaits a savior to heal its many ills.

 

[jutfrank]

Is the following also awkward?

The world awaits a savior to heal its many ills.

No, but that's different. The to-infinitive phrase is doing different work there.

I think this is a good example to support my point that it's the you that is wrong in the original. (This of course is based on my dummy-it reading). Consider the grammatical and semantic difference between:

a savior to heal its ills
you to test your skills

In my view, the OP sentence will be okay with you removed: It awaits to test your skills ... Does anybody else agree with me about this?

 

[5jj]

No, but that's different. The to-infinitive phrase is doing different work there.

I think this is a good example to support my point that it's the you that is wrong in the original. Consider the grammatical difference between:

a savior to heal the world
you to test your skills

In my view, the OP sentence will be okay with you removed: It awaits to test your skills ... Does anybody else agree with me about this?

Not entirely. I agree that there is a grammatical difference between a savior to heal the world and you to test your skills, but I don't think the second is wrong.

 

[jutfrank]

I don't think the second is wrong.

Honestly, on first reading, I thought it was passable too. It was only after some thought that I came to consider it ungrammatical. How about my question: Is it better/worse/the same as far as grammaticality goes with you removed, in your judgement?

... and it awaits to test your skills at a challenging but fun course

 

[5jj]

I'd say it's less awkward. I know that's a fuzzy answer, but it's the best I can come up with.

 

[Phaedrus]

Can "await" be used with a dummy subject?

I certainly don't use "await" with a dummy subject and extraposed infinitival clauses, but I tried to imagine myself doing so and managed to Google up what appears to be a genuine example of this from the late nineteenth century:

"Improvement and advance are the order of the day, and it only awaits the suggestion from some active brain to start the many thousands of inventors working out the problem" (International Annual of Anthony's Photographic Bulletin, 1895).

I parse the second independent clause as containing a nonreferential dummy "it" which stands in for and anticipates the infinitival clause following "brain": "To start the many thousands of inventors working out the problem only awaits the suggestion from some active brain."

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Is the following parsed in the same way?

Your ticket to board is waiting for you to retrieve, your seat is assigned, your journey is due to begin; it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

 

[5jj]

Your ticket to board is waiting for you to retrieve, your seat is assigned, your journey is due to begin; it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

I find that sentence very unnatural.

 

[jutfrank]

Is the following parsed in the same way?

Your ticket to board is waiting for you to retrieve, your seat is assigned, your journey is due to begin; it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

Yes, that's identical in structure to the OP sentence, in my view, at least.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

I find that sentence very unnatural.

Do you think it sounds more unnatural than the one Phaedrus found. repeated as follows?

... and it only awaits the suggestion from some active brain to start the many thousands of inventors working out the problem.

 

[Phaedrus]

Do you think it sounds more unnatural than the one Phaedrus found. repeated as follows?

As I see it, raymodaliaspollyon, there is one big syntactic difference between these two examples:

. . . it only awaits the suggestion from some active brain to start the many thousands of inventors working out the problem" (International Annual of Anthony's Photographic Bulletin, 1895).

. . . it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

In the example I found, the noun phrase following "awaits" ("the suggestion from some active brain") functions as the direct object of "awaits," not as the subject of the infinitival clause ("to start the many thousands of inventors working out the problem"), which lacks an overt subject. The infinitival clause is equivalent in meaning to "for the many thousands of inventors to start working out the problem," in which paraphrase the infinitival clause does have an overt subject. We could even rewrite the original example as follows:

• It only awaits the suggestion of some active brain for the many thousands of inventors to start working out the problem.
• For the many thousands of inventors to start working out the problem only awaits the suggestion of some active brain.

In the example you found, by contrast, the NP following "awaits" (namely, "you") does not function as the direct object of "awaits."

• ??!!*To pack your bags and stow them on board only awaits you.

It wants to be interpreted as the overt subject of the infinitival clause, insofar as it is "you" who is the packer and stower of the bags. Essentially, then, "awaits" lacks a direct-object noun phrase in the example you found. But "await" requires a direct object; it subcategorizes for one, if I may use my Chomskyan vocabulary. (Of course, I can't deny that there are sentences like "She awaits"; however, in such cases, I would say that there is an implied direct object.) So the mind of the native speaker tries to have it both ways. We try to parse the selfsame NP ("you") as direct object and as subject of the infinitival, and, this being impossible, we find the construction extremely unnatural (or even ungrammatical). Even if we could have it both ways at once, look how absurd the result would be:

• ??!!*For you to pack your bags and stow them on board only awaits you.

OK, now I really must return to the task I have been avoiding. Thanks for reading.

 

[jutfrank]

Yes, I see it like Phaedrus.

What I was trying to say from the beginning is that in the original sentence, the inclusion of you is wrong. If the preposition for were included, it would be okay and the meaning would be obvious:

It awaits for you to test your skills ...

The original sentence as it stands appears to have you as an object of awaits, which leads to the (mis?)interpretation that it is co-referential with the golf course and you is what is being awaited. I'm pretty sure that the author meant for you to be the agent of the testing rather than the patient of the awaiting.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Yes, I see it like Phaedrus.

What I was trying to say from the beginning is that in the original sentence, the inclusion of you is wrong. If the preposition for were included, it would be okay and the meaning would be obvious:

It awaits for you to test your skills ...

The original sentence as it stands appears to have you as an object of awaits, which leads to the (mis?)interpretation that it is co-referential with the golf course and you is what is being awaited. I'm pretty sure that the author meant for you to be the agent of the testing rather than the patient of the awaiting.

Are the following sentences okay?

A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.
It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.

 

[5jj]

On of several problems in this thread, raymondaliasapollyon, is the number of sentences in play. Apart rom those presented by other members, you have asked about these:
1. The crazy golf in Camden has been rebuilt recently and it awaits you to test your golfing abilities at a challenging but extremely fun course.
2. The golf course named "Crazy Golf" awaits you to test your golfing abilities at a challenging but extremely fun course.
3. Mike asked me to help a man.
4. The crazy golf in Camden has been rebuilt recently and it awaits you to test your golfing abilities.
5. The world awaits a savior to heal its many ills.
6. Your ticket to board is waiting for you to retrieve, your seat is assigned, your journey is due to begin; it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.
7. A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.
8. It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.

It would probably make life a little easier to concentrate on one sentence, and one specific question.

 

[jutfrank]

Are the following sentences okay?

A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.
It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.

Yes, they're fine.

 

[jutfrank]

It would probably make life a little easier to concentrate on one sentence, and one specific question.

Yes, please.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

On of several problems in this thread, raymondaliasapollyon, is the number of sentences in play. Apart rom those presented by other members, you have asked about these:
1. The crazy golf in Camden has been rebuilt recently and it awaits you to test your golfing abilities at a challenging but extremely fun course.
2. The golf course named "Crazy Golf" awaits you to test your golfing abilities at a challenging but extremely fun course.
3. Mike asked me to help a man.
4. The crazy golf in Camden has been rebuilt recently and it awaits you to test your golfing abilities.
5. The world awaits a savior to heal its many ills.
6. Your ticket to board is waiting for you to retrieve, your seat is assigned, your journey is due to begin; it only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.
7. A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.
8. It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.

It would probably make life a little easier to concentrate on one sentence, and one specific question.

Did you know comparison of different sentences is a major way to bring out properties of particular structures in generative studies?

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Yes, they're fine.

Compare the following:

a. It only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.
b. A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.

Do you know why "await" takes "you" as the object in sentence b but infelicitously so in sentence a?

Also consider the following pair:

c. It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.
d. It only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

Why is the "it + verb + pronominal object + to-infinitive" pattern okay with sentence c but not with sentence d?

 

[jutfrank]

Compare the following:

a. It only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.
b. A decision awaits you on the other side of the bridge that brought you here.

Do you know why "await" takes "you" as the object in sentence b but infelicitously so in sentence a?

Because of what we've been discussing—that in a. there's an infinitival clause. Sentence b. is comparably simpler. The PP is merely an adjunct.

Also consider the following pair:

c. It will benefit you to take the time and learn what is needed to get your job done.
d. It only awaits you to pack your bags and stow them on board.

Why is the "it + verb + pronominal object + to-infinitive" pattern okay with sentence c but not with sentence d?

Obviously, they use different verbs, and so the patterns used are different. I think what we're discussing is whether await somebody to do something is a permissible pattern, not whether any verb + pronominal + to-infinitive is permissible. Sentence c. is fine.