Search results for 'tag:Constructions tag:Abstract nouns' matching tags 'Constructions' and 'Abstract nouns'

Re: gerund or verbal noun

CalifJim — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:25:23 GMT

All of your examples are gerunds if we stick to modern terminology.

Forget about the terminology verbal noun. It's total garbage!

It has many different definitions, depending on the author and when the grammar book was written.
_____________

The modern definition is given at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbal_noun

A verbal noun is a noun formed directly as an inflexion of a verb or a verb stem, sharing at least in part its constructions. This term is applied especially to gerunds, and sometimes also to [bare] infinitives and supines [i.e., full infinitives].

That is, there are three types of verbal noun: gerunds, bare infinitives, and full infinitives.

So anything that is a gerund is also a verbal noun, because a gerund is one of the types of verbal nouns.
____________

The modern definition is echoed at

http://www.ielanguages.com/english.html

Gerunds: [Like participles,] Gerunds are also formed by adding -ing to the verb, but they function as a verbal noun [as opposed to the participle, which is a verbal adjective] and are normally preceded by articles or demonstratives. The singing was excellent.
___________

A completely different definition is found here:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O29-VERBALNOUN.html

VERBAL NOUN. A category of noncountable abstract noun derived from a verb, in English by adding the suffix -ing. Like the verb from which it derives, it refers to an action or state: writing in The writing has taken too long; hearing in His hearing is defective. Verbal nouns are frequently combined with the preposition of and a noun phrase that corresponds to the subject or object in a clause: The grumbling of his neighbours met with no response (compare His neighbours grumbled); His acting of Hamlet won our admiration (compare He acted Hamlet). Verbal nouns contrast with deverbal nouns, that is, other kinds of nouns derived from verbs, such as attempt, destruction, and including nouns ending in -ing that do not have verbal force: building in The building was empty. They also contrast with the gerund, which also ends in -ing, but is syntactically a verb.

Note the last (underlined) sentence. By this definition only usages like The neighbors were acting like fools are considered gerunds -- not all the other examples that preceded -- examples that we would all agree are gerunds in current terminology.
_____________

The next definition is more than 100 years old, and I've seen it quoted on this site. Note that it is classified (see the URL) under "Classic Literature". It is useful only as a historic document -- not as a guide to modern English and modern syntactic analysis.

http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/wmbaskervill/bl-wmbaskervill-grammar-parts-nouns.htm

An English Grammar

1896

by W. M. Baskervill & J. W. Sewell

273. It [the gerund] differs from the participle in being always used as a noun: it never belongs to or limits a noun.

It differs from the verbal noun in having the property of governing a noun (which the verbal noun has not) and of expressing action (the verbal noun merely names an action, Sec. II).

[Sec. II. is actually Sec. 11, where nouns are discussed. The discussion of verbal nouns is within a category called Abstract Nouns, so in Section 11 verbal nouns are called by their more specific name: Verbal Abstract Nouns.]

II. The VERBAL ABSTRACT NOUNS Originate in verbs, as their name implies. They may beâ

(1) Of the same form as the simple verb. The verb, by altering its function, is used as a noun; as in the expressions, "a long run" "a bold move," "a brisk walk "
[These are called deverbal nouns in modern terminology -- or 'zero-related nominals' or just 'nouns'.]

(2) Derived from verbs by changing the ending or adding a suffix: motion from move, speech from speak, theft from thieve, action from act, service from serve.
[These,too, are called deverbal nouns nowadays -- or just 'nouns'.]

(3) Derived from verbs by adding -ing to the simple verb. It must be remembered that these words are free from any verbal function They cannot govern a word, and they cannot express action, but are merely names of actions. They are only the husks of verbs, and are to be rigidly distinguished from gerunds (Secs. 272, 273). [These are nouns that end in -ing. They have acquired fixed meanings as nouns, referring to something more concrete than the action of the underlying verb.]

To avoid difficulty, study carefully these examples:

The best thoughts and sayings of the Greeks; the moon caused fearful forebodings; in the beginning of his life; he spread his blessings over the land; the great Puritan awakening; our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting; a wedding or a festival; the rude drawings of the book; masterpieces of the Socratic reasoning; the teachings of the High Spirit; those opinions and feelings; there is time for such reasonings; the well-being of her subjects; her longing for their favor; feelings which their original meaning will by no means justify; the main bearings of this matter.
______________

It is debatable whether anything whatsoever is to be gained in the study of modern English by resurrecting these older definitions.

CJ

About omission of the articles

Anonymous — Sat, 19 May 2007 16:07:10 GMT

I have 2 questions. I'd be happy if someone answer them.

(1) Omitting "the" from "the Abstract Noun" can be seen especially in phrases that have inside them the Verb-Object structure, as in "protection of nature", "lack of food" and "construction of a building". Can we always omit "the" from phrases that have inside them the Verb-Object structure?

(2) Omitting "the" from "the Abstract Noun" can hardly be seen in phrases that have inside them the Verb-Subject structure, as in "the arrival of a train", and "the coming of a new age".

And It can hardly be seen in phrases that have inside them the Complement (Adjective)-Subject structure, as in "the importance of training", and "the value of gold".

Why can't we omit "the" from phrases that have inside them the Verb-Subject structure, or the Complement(Adjective)-Subject structure?

Re: SOS please.....

Pioussoul — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 13:55:43 GMT

Anonymous wrote:

wussup everybody... i've got a Grammar exam at 14.00.. I really have no clue..

In Adverbial Clauses, we have a part called alternate structure, it's kinda changin' the subordinate clause into a new structure.

This new structure is either : coordinate clause, prepositional phrase, participal phrase, or an absolute construction.

Prepositional phrases differ, we have prepositional phrase with gerund, prepositional phrase with abstract noun.

This is one of the exemples provided:

Adverbial Clause of Time:

Alternate structure:

After we finished breakfast, we went for a walk.

1/Coordinate clause: We finished breakfast;(=and) then we went for a walk.

2/Prepositional phrase with gerund: After finishing breakfast(After we had finished breakfast), we went for a walk.

3/Participal phrase: Having finished breakfast(=After we had finished breakfast), we went for a walk.

4/Absolute construction: Breakfast finished(=After breakfast had been finished by us), we went for a walk.

My Qs are:

In the participal phrase: Having finshed breakfast, why isn't it simply breakfast finished? We have we added Having?

If after was not at the same time a subordinate conj and a preposition, how could we find the appropriate preposition?

a/How is this absolute construction made?

b/What can we use to refer to time, place,concession, result, cause, and purpose?

c/"Then" used in the coordinate clause is not among the coordinate conjenctions we learnt (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so), how come?

Thank you very much,, and wish me all hard luck...

NB. English is my third language, I'm studyin' it at the uni, 2nd year, I can sort myself out when speaking but writing and Grammar ...

Like what Marius has mentioned, you posted too many questions at a time, and this is hard for us to help you.

Post one question per thread so that we could help you.

Alternate structures of clauses.

Veevanna — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:12:21 GMT

Hello everybody.

In Grammar, adverbial clauses have alternate structures, this means changing the structure of the clause into a new one, it can be either: coordinate clause, prepositional phrase with gerund or with abstract noun, participal phrase or an absolute constraction.

We have the following exemple:

After we finished breakfast, we went for a walk.

Coordinate Clause: We finished breakfast; then we went for a walk.

Prepositional phrase with Gerund: After finishing breakfast, we went for a walk.

Participal Phrase: Having finished breakfast, we went for a walk.

Absolute Construction: Breakfast finished, we went for a walk.

My Qs are:

a/"Then" is not among the coordinate conj. we studied (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so). Why is it used in the Coordinate clause?

b/ What are the appropriate prepositions we can use to refer to time, place, concession, purpose, reason and result?

Thank you!

SOS please.....

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 10:05:43 GMT

wussup everybody... i've got a Grammar exam at 14.00.. I really have no clue..

In Adverbial Clauses, we have a part called alternate structure, it's kinda changin' the subordinate clause into a new structure.

This new structure is either : coordinate clause, prepositional phrase, participal phrase, or an absolute construction.

Prepositional phrases differ, we have prepositional phrase with gerund, prepositional phrase with abstract noun.

This is one of the exemples provided:

Adverbial Clause of Time:

Alternate structure:

After we finished breakfast, we went for a walk.

1/Coordinate clause: We finished breakfast then we went for a walk.

2/Prepositional phrase with gerund: After finishing breakfast, we went for a walk.

3/Participal phrase: Having finished breakfast, we went for a walk.

4/Absolute construction: Breakfast finished, we went for a walk.

My Qs are:

In the participal phrase: Having finshed breakfast, why isn't it simply breakfast finished? We have we added Having?

If after was not at the same time a subordinate conj and a preposition, how could we find the appropriate preposition?

a/How is this absolute construction made?

b/What can we use to refer to time, place,concession, result, cause, and purpose?

c/"Then" used in the coordinate clause is not among the coordinate conjenctions we learnt (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so), how come?

Thank you very much,, and wish me all hard luck...

NB. English is my third language, I'm studyin' it at the uni, 2nd year, I can sort myself out when speaking but writing and Grammar ...

Re: is/are

Rothkowitz — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 15:50:27 GMT

I sent this a a message to Grammar Geek:

Thanks, but....I understand there is a "primary way"...Perhaps I'm not being clear. I'm not asking how this is most often said etc. etc...my interest is academic, viz., is it somehow acceptable to say this the other way: "There are sadness and..."

Yes, it sounds odd and does not seem primary to me as well....however, as per Yoong's response and several grammar texts, it is not easily impeachable. My question is, would we have to accept such a formulation. I know "there is" operates somewhat strangely because it is an existential construction. For example, we say "Where ARE the cat and the dog?" but "There IS a cat and a dog"; "There is sadness and happiness"; "A cat and a dog ARE here" "Sadness and happiness ARE in the world." I'm just asking about the "There ARE x and y..." form, particularly about uncountable nouns (abstract nouns) and precisely because it sounds odd but is difficult to reject logically

Thanks in advance for your input...

Re: How much abstract an abstract noun is?

Clive — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:20:17 GMT

Hi,

"Because of a confusion with that type of sentence, it is a curiously common error to put a comma in the absolute construction"
Should not we use "beacause of confusion..."? Confusion is an abstract noun and can't take 'a' before it.Yes, 'a confusion' is wrong. Your following examples, with 'a', are correct.

Best wishes, Clive

How much abstract an abstract noun is?

elcid — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:47:06 GMT

Hi, I was reading some resource of grammar on internet and came across this sentence.
"Because of a confusion with that type of sentence, it is a curiously common error to put a comma in the absolute construction"
Should not we use "beacause of confusion..."? Confusion is an abstract noun and can't take 'a' before it.

Similarly for sentences like:
"what a beautiful day!" 'A' refers to day right? so it's okay to use it here.
and for "what a nuisance!" Nuisace, can it be counted? If no then why use 'A'?
and for many more sentences similar to "what a mystery!", "what a beauty!" Or is it that my understanding is wrong and we should use "what nuisance!", "what msytery!" , "what beauty!".

Hope to get some comments soon.

Re: I have no/I do not have

CalifJim — Thu, 12 Jan 2006 03:10:32 GMT

"do not have any ..." (or "don't have any ...") has the same meaning as "have no ...".

There is, however, a tendency to use the "have no ..." constructions when an abstract noun follows.

I have no [idea why ... / patience for ... / hope of .... / instinct for ... / ability at ... / interest in ... / reason to ... ] ...

With concrete nouns, "don't have" may be a bit more common.

I don't have any [money / butter / paper / books / ...].

This is not a rule. Both constructions can be used with both abstract and concrete nouns.

CJ

Re: Recipe Writing assigment

Cleo — Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:09:35 GMT

Nona The Brit wrote:
Did you have to do everything in the order given or just through the poem? IT would be easier if not in order. Anyway, working through the requirements you seem to have met them (in my humble opinion that is) apart from the comments below. This was a difficult assignment and you have done well!

1. Begin the poem with a metaphor. - you have used a simile not a metaphor.
2. Say something specific but utterly preposterous.
3. Use at least one image for each of the five sense, either in succession or scattered randomly throughout the poem.
4. Use one example of synesthesia (mixing the senses--see the example in the lecture this week).- this is not synesthesia.
5. Use the proper name of a person and the proper name of a place. Still use titles not tittles.
6. Contradict something you said earlier in the poem.
7. Change direction in the poem--digress from the last thing you said.
8. Use a word (slang?) that you've never heard in a poem before.
9. Use an example of false cause/effect logic.
10. Use a piece of "borrowed talk"; that is, eavesdrop on some people, write down a sentence or fragment of a sentence that they say (out of context--it's best if you don't know what they're talking about) and use it in the poem.
11. Create a metaphor using the following construction: "The (adjective) (concrete noun) of (abstract noun)..." Don't think this works
12. Use an image in such a way as to reverse its usual connotation. Not sure about this line.
13. Make the persona or characters in the poem do something he/she/they could not do in real life.
14. Refer to yourself in the third person and using a nickname.
15. Write in the future tense, such that part of the poem seems to be a prediction.
16. Modify a noun with an unlikely adjective. a pimple shaped bump is not unlikely.
17. Make a declarative assertion that sounds convincing but ultimately makes no sense.
18. Use a phrase from a language other than English.
19. Make a non-human object say or do something human. (Personify something.) Its not it's
20. Close the poem with a vivid image that makes no new statement, but "echoes" an image from earlier in the poem.

On #5, did you mean #8?