@Cerberus Hello sir! May I ask you a Greek question?

I have some trouble understanding how δοκέω works as an impersonal verb. My textbook says that when it's impersonal, it takes a subject infinitive. But whenever I encounter it in this capacity, it seems rather that a nominative noun is the subject of the subsequent infinitive. Take, for example, my most recent question.

@ktm5124 Ah, it can be used in both ways.

The plan seems to be nice to me, is what your book says.

I seem the plan to be nice = I think the plan to be nice, is what you will also find often.

I remember being confused about this, too.

I, too, learned only about the former predicate frame (use of the verb with complements).

Oh, interesting.

@Cerberus If we consider this sentence: δόξαι τ᾽ ἂν αὐτὴ [θεωρίᾱ] μόνη δι᾽ αὑτὴν ἀγαπᾶσθαι (Nic. Eth. 1177b.1)

Is theoria the predicate noun, and agapasthai the subject infinitive?

My translation then would be (with some help from Simpliciter Christianus): And it would seem that contemplation alone is loved for its own sake.

But I am still a little confused, since the "predicate noun" seems to be the real subject here... not the "subject infinitive".

@ktm5124 That is a good translation, but it is not very literal.

The subject of δόξαι is αὐτὴ [θεωρίᾱ] with or without μόνη.

So it is simply "contemplation may seem to be loved".

I would call the infinitive a complementary infinitive (that's what we called it).

You could say it is a subject complement, or a complement to the (finite) verb.

@Cerberus Oh, I see. In that case, doxai is not impersonal.

It would make sense then that agapasthai is the complementary infinitive, as opposed to a subject infinitive.

I suppose the lesson I learned is this: when dokeo is in the third person singular, you can't always assume that it's impersonal.

Ah, true.

Of course 3 and 4 can also have a.c.i. or complementary infinitives.

The boundaries are muddy.

In 1. and 2., there is an implied judge that is not expressed.

"It seems that..., it seems best to..."