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

Re: Gerund=past vs Infinitive=present or future

Goodman — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:57:20 GMT

Miche wrote:
Hi, JT.
I can see you don't like rules much and I agree with you. Rules are too restrictive, hamper one's "feeling" the language and deprive him/her of the pleasure of speaking the language. That is a major problem with English learners in my country - they can recite mile-long lists of rules but they simply cannot speak. That's because they start thinking of rules whenever they try to say something. However, non-native speakers need guidelines to learn a language. Probably balance is the key.
As for Seyfihoca's "rule", I think it is very interesting. I've never thought about that. I'm just tempted - linguistically - to think of more such words. And if we are to elaborate on Seyfihoca's assumption, I think we can place Mr. M's four examples in a third group - verbs followed by other verbs that express simultaneous actions.

I agree with you with the highlighted points

I think there are several stages of English learning one must go through before he can express thoughts and idea fluently at will. Without question, stage 1 is to learn the grammar. We need to establish that as a foundation so that more learning can be built on it. At that stage, most learners rely on grammar and text books. Whatever the book says, it must be true and for the most part, it is. But once we pass beyond the basics, more and more questions will surface as our English knowledge gradually builds and accumulates on what we learned.

Next level is to build and expand our vocabulary. Many learners depend on the translation of dictionary in their mother tongue, which can be a problem because what the translated meaning means in their mother tongue often donât carry same weight in meaning in English, or even gone completely off âcourse. This can be frustrating as they learn from time to time they are using words incorrectly.

Speaking from experience, this is the time when one has to be ânaturalizedâ, or âimmersedâ in a constant English speaking environment with natives where he can learn speech patterns, sentence structure, how natural English sounds, and proper word usage; if he is motivated to leap to the next level. This process can take years to refine and many learners will develop a feeling of being stuck at the same spot. Unfortunately many learners are satisfied to just have learned these skills to get by and probably reluctant to the take the next level which is to develop an ability to think, to process logic and to make reasonable arguments in English. This will require all of our mental capacity and the acquired English skill we have learned, and stored in our brain, which is actually a lot harder than just talking about it.

Well I hope you guys donât think I am crazy!

Re: Gerund as appositive

Specter — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:15:32 GMT

Whl626 wrote:
Specter wrote:

"Her job, analyzing data brought in by satellites, is exciting."

The gerund phrase 'analyzing data brought in by satellites' is an appositive modifying 'her job.' Does it mean then, that a gerund may also function as an adjective or is there another way to explain this?

The words ' analyzing ' and ' exciting ' in the sentence are present participle NOT gerund.

Yes 'exciting' is a present participle and it functions as an adjective. I agree. And yes, 'analyzing data brought in by satellites' could also be a present participle functioning as an adjective such as in this sentence:

'Analyzing data brought in by satellites, she has found a lot of interesting information.'

In this example, 'analyzing...' modifies the subject 'she' and points out the action of the subject.

However, in the previous example it doesnt imply that the action is done by the subject 'her job' unlike this sentence:

"Jane, sitting at her desk, read the letter carefully.'

I believe 'sitting at her desk' is a participle phrase because it describes the action of the subject 'Jane'. 'Her job' on the other hand cannot do an action.

Compare:

'My hobby, reading, improves my vocabulary.' (gerund)

Jane, reading in her room, got bored and went for a walk.' (participle)

Please explain if my interpretation is wrong. I would appreciate it.

Thanks,

Specter

Language-related misunderstandings

Cool Breeze — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:44:08 GMT

I was flying Lloyd Aereo Boliviano from Santa Cruz, Bolivia, to Miami, USA. An announcement had been made about landing cards: US citizens needed only one card, all other nationalities needed two.

A steward walked down the aisle giving cards to the passengers. He asked me: "Are you American?" I replied: "No." I didn't mention my nationality because I had just been told everybody except Americans was going to get two cards; in other words, my nationality was irrelevant.

I certainly don't look South American and I was probably the only European on the aircraft, and thus the steward found it hard to believe I wasn't American. He was used to everybody¹ with fair hair and complexion being American, so he said: "What are you, German?" I said: "No, I'm Finnish." The word Finnish wasn't in his vocabulary and he probably thought I said: "I'm finished," and his interpretation of it was that I was getting cute with him, and he gave me only one landing card.

I had to go and get another card at Miami Airport to get through the customs.

¹Those who want a possessive form for the subject of the gerund should read: He was used to everybody's with fair hair and complexion being American.
Cf. He was used to me/my being late.

Re: future tense

Dawnstorm — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:38:45 GMT

Inchoateknowledge wrote:
What does (simple) future tense mean in this sentence?

The grammarian (it is a grammarian, isn't it?) you're quoting would probably tell you that there is no future tense. Many linguists claim English has only two tenses: Past and Non-past (sometimes called present). Like Marius Hancu said, the grammarian might tell you its about "intention"; will is a modal auxiliary, therefore "will go" is not the future tense of "go". Instead, it's present tense with modified "mood".

Whether English expresses future through tense or not is a controversial question. Your quote doesn't support the existence of a future tense, so - in this context - "future tense" would be a meaningless term.

Thomson/Martinet, in A Practical English Grammar, for example, say:

There is no future tense in modern English, but for convenience we often use the term 'future simple' to describe the form will/shall + bare infinitive.

This is not uncontested. It's a purely terminological debate, though, depending on the definition of tense. Whether there is a future tense or not has no bearing at all at your language proficiency, if you know how to express the future in English. There are other terminological debates: for example, I've heard linguists say there's no passive voice in English, and that the distinction between present participle and gerund cannot be sustained. Different ways to look at language yield different vocabulary to talk about it.

Re: Many questions about infinitive, gerund and participle.

Goodman — Fri, 10 Feb 2006 01:36:50 GMT

Hello Paco,

Very interesting thought indeed! My English learning and usage have not gone this far back. So I can only speak in terms of what is learned from recent years. Because of my ELS background and the âall-most-zeroâ knowledge of English, I had to focus on building my vocabulary and grammar in the early going. I had the fortune of having an English teacher who came back to the US from a contract with Beijing University in my ESL class for 2 years. Her name is Mrs. Milton. She was part of the reason why I can read and write! Anyway, I am not an expert of English, oh no! not even close. But I love English and I am still working at refining it. This forum gives me the opportunity not only to share but also learn from the real teachers. One or two of you in this forum may have already know me, so please bare with my boring you. Sometimes, I can be a bit too long-winded with my threads. For that, I apologize. But I am open to comments and discussions.

Re: To be to

CalifJim — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:41:54 GMT

The schwa sound, frequently represented by "a" in writing, is ubiquitous in English. It substitutes for a great many words. One such case is "Come on-a my house", where "-a" substitutes for "to", hence, "Come on to my house".

The other usage in the text posted is not a substitute at all. In older English the gerund form not only ended in "ing", but it began with "a". To give the flavor of older or dialectal English, the initial "a" is often included on the "ing" forms in the type of song quoted here. The final "g" is often omitted in this style, and other non-standard grammar and/or vocabulary may be added for color.
"We were a-sittin' on the porch. We were a-pickin' the ol' banjo. Jus' then ol' Billy-Jo come a-courtin' Peggy-Sue. Now don't that beat all get-out!"

CJ

Re: Phrases (Appositives and Participial)

mirapence — Sat, 27 Mar 2004 14:39:58 GMT

Hi Camilus,

You've given me a lot of homework. it weighs on my back, but it never is the last straw. Fortunately, my back is strong enough.

I Appositives vs. Parenthetical Element

a) Neil Armstrong, the first man who walked on the moon, is a native of Ohio.

Here, âthe first man who walked on the moonâ is, as you already know, a noun phrase acting as an appositive. Though you rid this sentence of this noun phrase, the meaning does not change significantly. Therefore, you may as well treat it as a parenthetical element.

b) Jeff's ambition, to become a famous footballer, is within his reach.

Again, âto become a famous footballerâ is an appositive phrase all right, but this time it's an infinitive phrase and to be exact, an adjective phrase that modifies âambitionâ. Some say that this phrase in this case is a modifier essential to the meaning. Removing it may more or less influence the meaning. But there are others voicing different opinions. I'd like to adhere to keeping the phrase.

*âfootballerâ; did you just quote it or is it your own vocabulary? Just curious.
In my part of the world, we call them football players.

II Gerund Phrase vs. Participial Phrase

FLYING ABOVE THE LAKE at this time of night seems a little dangerous. (gerund phrase)

A gerund is an embodiment of a verb and a noun all together, but in reality acts like a noun. âFlying above the lakeâ is a noun phrase, and at the same time the subject of this sentence. Naturally, âflyingâ is an unmistakable gerund.

RUNNING DOWN THE STREET, Alicia tripped and fell. (participial phrase)

Yes, âRunning down the streetâ, here, is a participial phrase. How do I know? You can assume without much difficulty that this is a shortened form from an adverbial clause. Namely, âAs she was running down the streetâ should be the archetype.

She was running, and she is 'a running girl'. Remember the way I explained before (i.e. a sleeping baby)? It is easy to find out. You can apply the same principle to the rest of sentences as well.

Cramming for tests is not a good idea. (gerund phrase)

Working around the clock, the firefighters finally put out the last of the California brush fires. (participial phrase)

III Phrases Classification

You are forcing me a hard labor. haha,,

I may need much time and a considerable cyber space of this board to explain all the classification in detail. Iâm afraid I canât do it all at the moment, but I am going to give you the principal idea about them. You may come back again and again, and Iâd be happy to help you. Only some basics for today.

Depending on linguists, the terms they use widely vary. Some people jokingly say there are as many terms as the number of grammarians. Couldnât I have mine in my own right? I dare not! But I will follow some of the most common and conventional classifications.

Let me make a few simple sentences to make them easy to compare with each other.

1. Adverbial Phrase

There are many books ON THE TABLE.

The phrase âon the tableâ is classified as an adverbial.
It modifies the verb. Let me rephrase it this way. Many books are ON THE TABLE. The relation between the verb, âareâ and the phrase, âon the tableâ becomes very conspicuous.

2. Adjective Phrase

For convenienceâs sake, I am using a similarly worded expression.

The books ON THE TABLE are all mine.

The phrase retains the same shape, but the function of it is quite different.
This phrase, âon the tableâ is modifying âthe booksâ. One of the functions of adjectives is modifying the nouns. Thus, âon the tableâ in this particular situation is called an adjective phrase.

*Some linguists classify such phrases including adverbials and adjectives as prepositional phrases.

3. Noun Phrase

ORGANIZING THE BOOKS on the table is a piece of cake.

As I mentioned above, a gerund is considered as a noun. This phrase, âOrganizing the booksâ is essentially a collection of nouns. Together, they form the subject of the sentence. As you know, only nouns and pronouns are eligible for subjects.

There are so may other patterns and different variants that need to be explained, but one step at a time is sometimes the more efficient way of learning. That is about all for today. Camilus, I thank you for asking me. Expecting more from you, see ya!

Mirapence