Abstract
The article suggests that, contrary to the current classifications in Czech materials for study of Latin syntax, we should not take subordinate clauses with ut that depend on the verbs facio, efficio, and perficio ("to cause") as factive clauses, but rather as nonfactive ones (conveying only the notion of effort, but not necessarily the positive realization of the action). It is true that in some cases these clauses seem to present the action as factive, but this is caused by the semantics of the main clause (e.g. when the main verb is in the perfect tense implying that the effort was successful); this is supported also by the prevalency of the negator ne over non (according to, admittedly, limited statistics based on the material from Livius and Seneca Minor).
At the end, the article also stresses that there are true factive clauses with ut after facio, but in these cases, the verb facio does not mean "to cause", but "to do" (which I call a "transparent" meaning, without any contribution to the semantics of the sentence).