Search results for 'tag:Determiners tag:Gerunds' matching tags 'Determiners' and 'Gerunds'

Re: I need clarification on this

Cool Breeze — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:50:01 GMT

Buddhaheart wrote:
1. We really appreciate your giving us your opinion regarding this issue. OK

2. We really appreciate you giving us your opinion regarding this issue. Not OK

What comes after the main verb âappreciateâ is a noun phrase âyour giving â¦â. âGivingâ is a gerund acting as a noun. What precedes a noun must be a determiner and in this case âyourâ. âYouâ is a pronoun and therefore is incorrect.

Hi Buddhaheart

Your is a possessive form of you. By the same logic, I assume, you would also say:

We really appreciate the French's giving us their opinion regarding this issue.

CB

Re: I need clarification on this

Amoras — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 07:00:32 GMT

First and foremost, thanks for the reply. I really appreciate it.

1. We really appreciate your giving us your opinion regarding this issue. OK

2. We really appreciate you giving us your opinion regarding this issue. Not OK

What comes after the main verb âappreciateâ is a noun phrase âyour giving â¦â. âGivingâ is a gerund acting as a noun. What precedes a noun must be a determiner and in this case âyourâ. âYouâ is a pronoun and therefore is incorrect

For (1), i understand what you're trying to explain, but my question is, does it apply to all cases? For example, i suppose the sentence "I dont remember you giving me anything that night" is the correct instead of "I dont remember your giving me anything that night".

For (2), doesnt "you giving us your opinion" imply "the act of a person giving his opinion", therefore, doesnt sentence (2) imply the same meaning as "We really appreciate your act in giving us your opinion regarding this issue" ? Same goes for (3). But i think "We are looking forward to hearing your feedback" or "We are looking forward for you to give us your feedback" should be better sentences.

Sorry if im not getting the point, but it bothers me. Thanks again! =)

Re: I need clarification on this

Buddhaheart — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 02:06:47 GMT

1. We really appreciate your giving us your opinion regarding this issue. OK

2. We really appreciate you giving us your opinion regarding this issue. Not OK

You could turn these sentences into a complex one thus âWe really appreciate the fact that you considered our opinion regarding this issue.â

3. We are looking forward to your giving us your feedback. OK

âToâ here functions as a preposition and NOT as a marker of infinitive. Therefore âyour giving â¦â is noun phrase and the above reasoning also governs.

4. If it wasn't for my healing, he'd still be half dead. OK

Type II Conditional expressing unreal condition. He wasnât half dead because of me.

5. It was my talking that convinced him into believing us.

âConvincedâ means âcaused to believeâ. Consider revising the sentence thus: âIt was my sweet talking that convinced him.â or âI persuaded him to believe in us.â & etc.

6. It was my healing them that made them (to) win *won the fight.

The verb after âmadeâ is an infinitive without the marker âtoâ. A simple infinitive canât be in the past tense. For example, make me (to) cry (*cried); make me go (*went) away & so on

Re: what could come after a preposition?

CalifJim — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:27:38 GMT

The only thing that can come after a preposition to form a prepositional phrase is a noun phrase, usually a noun accompanied by its preceding determiner and perhaps an adjective. A relative clause may be added. The noun itself may be a gerund.

If the element after the candidate for a preposition looks like it's not a noun, then either of these holds:

a. The preposition candidate is not a preposition, but perhaps an adverb or conjunction.
b. The structure after the preposition candidate actually is a noun phrase.

Both of your examples are in the category labeled b.

In your first example bad should be viewed as an adjective used as a noun, 'promoted' to a noun because of the elision of situation or its equivalent, one.

The situation can be seen as a bad situation.
The situation can be seen as a bad one.

In your second example, bad and good are simply abstract uncountable nouns meaning that which is bad and that which is good, respectively.

CJ

Part of Speech identification

Anonymous — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:16:08 GMT

Hello, this is my first post here, I like to know these words
kilometer
centimeter

Are those words noun if they are standing alone ? if it's, what kind of noun it's, proper noun or abstract noun or etc ?

After that, I want to indentify the part of speech of the following setence by using the stanfard parser at http://nlp.stanford.edu:8080/parser/index.jsp
if you input,
convert kilometer to centimeter
it gives convert/VB kilometer/NN to/TO centimeter/VB

if you input,
convert 2 kilometers to centimeter
it gives convert/VB 2/CD kilometers/NNS to/TO centimeter/NN

You can refer to the tagset below, my question is, is the first input setence correct ? if it's correct the part of speech given by the program seems to be incorrect because
the centimeter should be noun instead of Verb, or am I wrong ? If you add the "2" as the second input the program gives the correct part of speech tagging,
it it because my first input grammar is incorrect ? Thank you.

Reference

1. CC  Coordinating conjunction  25.TO  to 
2. CD  Cardinal number           26.UH  Interjection 
3. DT  Determiner                27.VB  Verb, base form 
4. EX  Existential there   28.VBD Verb, past tense 
5. FW  Foreign word              29.VBG Verb, gerund/present participle 
6. IN  Preposition/subord.   30.VBN Verb, past participle 
218z     conjunction 
7. JJ  Adjective                 31.VBP Verb, non-3rd ps. sing. present 
8. JJR Adjective, comparative    32.VBZ Verb, 3rd ps. sing. present 
9. JJS Adjective, superlative    33.WDT wh-determiner 
10.LS  List item marker          34.WP  wh-pronoun 
11.MD  Modal                     35.WP  Possessive wh-pronoun 
12.NN  Noun, singular or mass    36.WRB wh-adverb 
13.NNS Noun, plural              37. #  Pound sign 
14.NNP Proper noun, singular     38. $  Dollar sign 
15.NNPS Proper noun, plural      39. .  Sentence-final punctuation 
16.PDT Predeterminer             40. ,  Comma 
17.POS Possessive ending         41. :  Colon, semi-colon 
18.PRP Personal pronoun          42. (  Left bracket character 
19.PP  Possessive pronoun        43. )  Right bracket character 
20.RB  Adverb                    44. "  Straight double quote 
21.RBR Adverb, comparative       45. `  Left open single quote 
22.RBS Adverb, superlative       46. "  Left open double quote 
23.RP  Particle                  47. '  Right close single quote 
24.SYM Symbol  48. "  Right close double quote

Re: Sentence analysis needed

milky — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:18:18 GMT

Inchoateknowledge wrote:

Andy = S

cleans = V

his = determiner, posessive pronoun

teeth= O

by brushing and gargling = PP in adverb function (denounscribes the way you do something)

"brushing and gargling" is a compound noun with two gerunds. They are also the objects of the preposition: by.

"and" is a co-ordinator.

Did you miss this post?

Re: Sentence analysis needed

Inchoateknowledge — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:08:11 GMT

Andy = S

cleans = V

his = determiner, posessive pronoun

teeth= O

by brushing and gargling = PP in adverb function (denounscribes the way you do something)

"brushing and gargling" is a compound noun with two gerunds. They are also the objects of the preposition: by.

"and" is a co-ordinator.

Re: The meaning of 'Gonna'

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:43:18 GMT

What is the word sucks in "Homework sucks"? Is it a verb or an adjective? If it is a verb, what does homework suck?

This brings up an excellent point, and a wonderful opportunity to discover the beautiful syntactic structure of the English language. The question at hand is "Does an English verb need to have an object?" Consider the simple construction, "I eat" (Subject-ActionVerb). It is a coherent English thought; there is no need to express what is eaten. Just because an English sentence contains an action verb does not mean an object of that action must occur. The neat thing is, though, that it can occur and the thought is just as coherent. "I eat pizza" (Subject-ActionVerb-Object) is an equally logical thought.

Action verbs that have an object of their action are said to be transitive, while those that do not are said to be intransitive. Objects can receive the action of their verb either directly or indirectly. An object which is indirectly acted upon only occurs when there is one which is directly acted upon as well. Objects which receive their verb's action directly are said to be direct, whereas those which receive it indirectly are said to be indirect. In the sentence "I baked them pizza," pizza is a direct object, and them is an indirect object.

We have observed three fundamental patterns of the English language:
                        Subject-IntransitiveVerb                                              (S-InV)                I eat.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-DirectObject                          (S-TrV-DO)         I eat pizza.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-IndirectObject-DirectObject (S-TrV-IO-DO)    I bake them pizza.

As it turns out, the entire English language follows only about six different fundamental patterns, depending on how you count them. Essentially, there are only three more. I find this fascinating, so here I have written a short exposition on the topic. I intend to learn as much from those who view this forum as they can learn from me, so please read, enjoy (hopefully), and critique it.

        An Inquiry into the Syntactical Structure of the English Language

Fundamental Parts of Speech
There exist various schemes that depict the fundamental parts of speech in the English language. The underlying assumption of them all is that every English word can be classified into a fairly small number of categories. According to a word's inherent qualities these are somewhat nebulous, but according to how the word is used in a sentence they our definitive. The scheme I adopt here models English words in seven divisions: nouns* (N), verbs (V), adjectives** (Adj), adverbs (Adv), prepositions (Prep), conjunctions (Conj), and interjections (Interj). No attempt will be put forth to define these whether operationally or inherently. That being beyond the scope of this work
*Nouns in this work refers to both nouns and pronouns. Though they constitute two distinct categories they are used virtually interchangeably distinguishable only by the inherent qualities they possess. (A point in which syntax is largely uninterested.)
**This class contains what other schemes might divide into the categories of articles, determiners, qualifiers, modifying nouns, etc.
A Steal Framework
Again the various models of English syntax would number the fundamental patterns differently. I have adopted a scheme of six. The patterns are concerned only with two parts of speech: verbs and nouns. They form a sort of a metal framework upon which the rest of the fundamental part bestow their graces connecting and decorating it into a beautiful masterpiece. I model English nouns as possessing eight unique functions (subject (S), direct object (DO), indirect object (IO), objective complement (OC), subjective complement (SC), object of the preposition (OP), noun of direct address (DA), and appositive (App)) and English verbs as possessing four unique functions (action verb*, linking verb (LV), state of being verb (Be), helping verb** (Aux)). Only the first five of the noun functions and the first three of the verb functions are used in constructing the patterns. The rest are added on later for decoration.
*As it has been aforementioned actions verbs are either transitive verbs (TrV), possessing objects, or intransitive verbs (InV), not possessing objects.
**Helping verbs also known as auxiliary verbs or simply auxiliaries serve solely to aid the one main verb of a syntactic pattern in expressing such complexities as tense, mood, or voice. Unlike other languages, English verb ending are unable to accomplish this consisting of only four principle parts with little variation or no variation for person or number. Rarely will you find a verb written more than four ways.

The Fundamental Syntactic Patterns
Some schemes include adjective and adverb elements. I do not, however, because I do not consider them the pegs on which other elements can hang. They are merely filler. I have put alternate examples in boldface type for where some find grounds for other patterns.

                                            1. S-Be*                    I am. or I am here.
                                            2. S-LV-SC*,*              I am Daniel. or I am good.
                                            3. S-InV                         I eat.
                                            4. S-TrV-DO*                I eat pizza.
                                            5. S-TrV-IO-DO*        I bake them pizza.
                                            6. S-TrV-DO-OC*,*    I consider pizza food. or I find pizza tasty.
* "I am here," or, "I am of the tribe of Benjamin," are examples of an adverb element on the S-Be pattern. Under some schemes this would be a new pattern, S-be-Adv. The adverb element, often referred to as the adverbial modifies the verb indicating where or when.
*The subjective complement is the completer of the subject. If it is an adjective it is called the predicate adjective (PA). If it is a noun it is called the predicate nominative or noun (PN). As a noun it is said to rename the subject (Daniel). As a adjective it is said to modify the subject (good). Under some schemes these two cases form distinct patterns (S-LV-PN and S-LV-PA).
*Depending on whether or not the definition of linking verb is broadened to include the state of being verbs, a separate pattern (S-be-SC) is often employed which in turn is typically divided into the two distinct patterns (S-be-PA and S-be-PN).
*Both direct and indirect objects are considered to be predicate complements (PC). So the distinction between them is sometimes lost and these patterns can be depicted S-TrV-PC, S-TrV-PC-PC, and S-TrV-PC-OC with the former two occasionally fusing into one pattern (S-TrV-PC).
*Sometimes a distinction is made between an objective complement that functions as a noun (pizza), objective noun (ON), and one that functions as a adjective (tasty), objective adjective (OA). Thus two distinct patterns are formed (S-TrV-DO-ON and S-TrV-DO-OA).

Whether or not it is wise to exclude the patterns S-Be-Adv, S-LV-PA, and S-TrV-OA, I do not know, but since I maintain that the fundamental syntactic units are composed of certain nouns and verbs I will. For now the other parts of speech and remaining nouns and verbs are for filling out the framework.

The Decorations and Connections
The remaining verbs, helping/auxiliary verbs (Aux), come before the verbs in the patterns and give them tense. Of the remaining nouns, nouns of direct address (DA) are when you address the person you are talking two by name, appositives come right after one of the nouns in the fundamental patterns and serve to rename them, and objects of the preposition are the words the prepositions (Prep) are relating to the rest of the sentence. Prepositions (Prep) then relate nouns to the rest of the sentence. Conjunction (Conj) join elements whether they be fundamental patterns, subject, or verbs. Interjections (Interj) do just that. Butt in breaking the flow of everything. Adjectives (Adj) modify nouns, and adverbs (Adv) modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.

These nine links and flesh may simply be one word or, as four of them (OP, App, Adj, and Adv) often are, be expanded into multiword units composed themselves of smaller units which in turn are linked to other units. Thus you have the massive interlocking structure of the English language.

What are these large units with in units though? They are either clauses or phrases.

Clauses
Clause contain both a subject and a verb but cannot stand alone as a complete thought. They are one of the fundamental units fleshed out. They come in three varieties those that will function as an adverb (Adv), those that will function as a adjective (Adj), and those that will function as a noun (not just OP and App, but the fundamental makeup of the patterns S, DO, IO, OC, and PN/SC).

Phrases:*
Phrases certain either a subject or a verb, but not both. The prepositional phrase--the unit Prep-OP (sometimes fleshed out with other elements)--functions as either an Adj, Adv, or a N. There are three phrase which are one of the six or nine depending on how you look at it fundamental patterns with the S severed from them. The gerund phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second principle part** and functions as a N. The participle phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second or fourth principle part** and functions as an Adj. The infinitive phrase is the one in which the verb must be in the infinitive (nearly synonymous with the first principle part** and functions as an Adj, Adv, or a N. A fifth and unusual type of phrase functions as a modifier (Adj or Adv) of the entire sentence, and is composed of a noun followed by a participial phrase.
*Sometimes the classifications of phrases are broadened to include a noun phrase, verb phrase, adjective phrase, adverb phrase, and appositive phrase. However, I will abstain from such a measure because noun phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as a N, appositive phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as an appositive (a N), adjective phrases are just any of the five above which can function as Adj, adverb phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as Adv, and verb phrases are just the verb of the six fundamental patterns with its auxiliaries.
**Sometimes English verbs are depicted as having three principle parts, (1) present, (2) past, and (3) past participle, presumably because the present participle of all English verbs is the present + -ing. However, the scheme used here is that which depicts four principle parts, (1) present, (2) present participle, (3) past, (4) past participle, which can be derived from the infinitive [to . . .] by asking the four questions (1) Today, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . .Currently, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to be] . . . , (3) Yesterday, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . . , (4) Previously, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to have] . . . of the infinitive.

Re: Use, usage, using & articles

paco2004 — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:44:02 GMT

Hello Ruslana

"Use" has two usages. The first one is as an uncountable noun and in this usage "use of X" means "activity of using X".
       (EX) The use of the four-letter word is taboo on TV.
In the second usage of "use", "use" is a countable noun and "a use of X" in this usage means "a purpose or function of using X".
       (EX) I am now talking about two uses of the word 'use'.
"Usage of X" is "a customary or established way of using X". It sometimes overlap in the usage with the "use of X" of the second usage.
       (EX) The linguists discussed the usages of the word.
"Using" is the gerund or present participle of the verb "use".

     1. I am interested in the* use of these words. (OK)
     2. I am interested in the* usage of these words.(OK)
     3. I am interested in using these words.
* Because you are talking about some words defined by the determiner "these", you need to make "use" or "usage" definite by putting THE before it.

paco

Re: "His being..." vs "Him being..."

Pinenut — Sat, 05 Nov 2005 00:52:33 GMT

Anonymous wrote:
A sentence recently came to the attention of my family, and we never did come to agreement on the correct form:

"Nov. 12th is my brother's birthday, and my mother will admit to his being a Valentine baby. (Grammar question: is it HIS being or HIM being?)

'his being' is correct.

The usage of 'admit to' requires a noun or an equivalent after the 'to' preposition.
Therefore, 'being' is used as a gerund preceded by a determiner 'his'.

If you use 'him', you are saying, "... will admit to him being a Valentine baby..." In this case, 'him' becomes the object of 'to' preposition of 'admit to'.
I don't know what it means when you say, "... will admit to him (whaever postmodifier follows)...."

In some construction, whether you use 'him' or 'his' may not matter much.

He minded his smoking cigarettes. = He minded his act of smoking.
He minded him smoking cigarettes. = He minded him who was smoking.

pine