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

Re: committed to

Avangi — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:54:29 GMT

New2grammar
Cool Breeze
all prepositions require a gerund

CB, I'm a little surprised to hear this.

She came to see me. (Is see a gerund?)

In this sentence, "to see" is an infinitive. I have been arguing that in this case "to" is not a preposition and is therefore exempted from CB's rule.

Yankee has kindly advised me that while BrE sources call the "to" an "infinitive marker," AmE sources consider it to still be a preposition. My apologies to New2grammar.

This leaves us in the awkward position of not allowing the "bare infinitive" to follow it's marker, "to," which is of course absurd. Thanks for hanging in on this, New2!

Re: participle as a subject

Cool Breeze — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:38:04 GMT

CalifJim
Your question opens up a good many sticky points in the terminology. Do we (Can we) talk about certain structures by naming them without regard to their function in context? Or not? Probably not. Is love a noun or a verb? Only context will tell.

Hmm... this seems to be another case of varying terminology. I have no objection to calling a participle an adjective, I'm just not used to that. Nor am I used to many other grammatical terms used here, like "a noun phrase". Don't get me wrong! I certainly don't mean there's anything wrong with it or that it is worse or better than the terms I am used to. I just had never heard it before I hit these forums. I can guess at the meaning of such expressions, of course.

The terminology must sometimes be confusing to learners whose native languages are so different from English that they don't even have verbs, let alone participles or gerunds! I can't start using terms I am not familiar with and thus I use the terms I learned to use in school ages ago. Hopefully I'll still be of use and assistance to some learners, at least to those who come from European countries. I'm sure I sometimes just confuse native speakers of English.

That tradition is centuries old in Europe. It is probably based on early grammarians' work and analysis of Latin. For example, "my" and its equivalents in all the grammar books that I have read and that deal with Finnish, Swedish, German, English and Latin grammar is invariably called a pronoun. In America, I think it's a called a possessive adjective? Perhaps in Britain too. Of course it isn't used instead of a noun and thus the name is misleading, but grammarians just call it a possessive pronoun anyway. It is a matter of what has been more or less consciously agreed upon. I have seen the term "dependent possessive pronoun" used to refer to "my", and the term "independent possessive pronoun" has been applied to words like "mine" because they don't need a noun after them. Therefore they are "independent". If I began to use such terms here, I'm sure I would confuse people even more!

Yes, context will tell, and I think it is plain to see in all cases. In Finnish, there are no such problems - if that is a problem at all. A noun cannot be mistaken for a verb. Nouns and verbs are always different words.

Cheers, CB

Re: Grammar- is using versus is by using

26TMNTJG2PG — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:58:07 GMT

I have recently found 'by using public transport' in the following sentence is closely connected with the prepositional phrase in LEO. Therefore, it should be a prepositional phrase that followed 'One way of lowering fuel consumption is'.

One way of lowering fuel consumption is by using public transport. - Your above assertion can only be correct if (the preposition) by is necessary. Let us see the functions of a preposition stated below to determine this.

The best time to practice water conservation is before a water shortage. (prepositional phrase = noun functioning as a complement - Besides it also tells us about the time.)

As for the noun phrase 'using public transport', it can also function as a gerund phrase according to the example below shown by LEO - gerund phrase is just a general name. One way of lowering fuel consumption is using public transport.

One of Serena Williams' biggest disappointments after her semifinal defeat was losing her spot for tennis singles in the Olympics. (gerund phrase = complement - Besides it also tells us about the disappointments.)

A preposition shows in what relation one thing stands to another, i.e. what one thing has to do with another in respect of Place, Situation, Circumstance and Time.

Unlike the following sentence which indicates a situation or circumstance, the preposition by is necessary:-

We learn more by not taking answers at face value.

Regards.

Re: Grammar- is using versus is by using

bhikkhu1991 — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:07:06 GMT

Hello,

I have recently found 'by using public transport' in the following sentence is closely connected with the prepositional phrase in LEO. Therefore, it should be a prepositional phrase that followed 'One way of lowering fuel consumption is'.

One way of lowering fuel consumption is by using public transport.

The best time to practice water conservation is before a water shortage. (prepositional phrase = noun functioning as a complement)
LEO-prepositional phrase= preposition + object of the preposition + modifiers.

As for the noun phrase 'using public transport', it can also function as a gerund phrase according to the example below shown by LEO.

One way of lowering fuel consumption is using public transport.

One of Serena Williams' biggest disappointments after her semifinal defeat was losing her spot for tennis singles in the Olympics. (gerund phrase = complement)
LEO- gerund phrase = gerund + modifiers, objects, or complements.

I am only a learner of English, I hope the experts or grammarians can correct this reply.

Thank you.

With best wishes.

Re: Grammar rules - check for correctness - a kind teacher please :)

Angle1 — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:30:38 GMT

Here are some examples

The main point is to explain the correct answer
The sentences are little-bit childisch ;they are some modified sentences. I am afraid that my explanations seems to be a little childisch, too. So please help me how to turn it into the right explanation.

Mary was real angry because Jack didnÂ´t show up

Real >> really - we use an adverb to determine the adjective

Fewer of the passangers is sick today

Fewer >> One - the verb is refers to singular, so we need to use singular pronoun

I asked my brother whom was on the phone

Whom >> who â Whom i sused in object case and with pronouns â we need a subject for the verb in the second clause

Jorge doesnÂ´t have no bullets in his rifle

No >> any - we should avoid double negation in written English. We could use either has + no or negation + any

I am just a little confused whether or not to go on exam.

Whether to be or not to be â I know how it should be, but I cannot explain it :/

Having be a dancer myself, I have excellent posture

Having be >> beeing â but how to explain it ???

I never did like these kind of exercises

These >> that â but could it be also this if I were pointing at it?

Kind is singular, so we need a singular demostrative pronoun

You telling the truth is ..

You >> your â telling is a gerund, gerunds are used like nouns. We need a possessive pronoun

The bakery depends on meal beeing delivered without delay

Meal >> mealÂ´s â beeing is a gerund, and meal refers to this gerund. We need to use a genitive form with âÂ´sâ

Re: Participles vs Gerunds

Cool Breeze — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:03:42 GMT

I have noticed that my way of analyzing English differs to an extent from what is taught in the Anglo-Saxon countries. This is how I see your examples:

There was never any stopping it. Stopping is a gerund. It is used (without a verb immediately before it) after a form of to be (was), and that is typical of gerunds. Stopping also has an object (it) in the sentence, which is quite common for a gerund.

He has the gall of a shoplifter returning an item for a refund. Returning is a present participle. He has the gall of a shoplifter is a complete main clause. By that I mean it has a subject (He), a finite verb / a main verb (has) and an object (the gall of a shoplifter). It qualifies as a sentence on its own; it is in no way incomplete. Returning an item for a refund is not a sentence or a clause because it has no finite verb. Returning connects it to the preceding clause and the meaning is thus made clear.

In traditional European grammar returning is said to begin a clause equivalent, but I know that that term is not used a lot in the UK and the USA. In your sentence we could have a subject and a finite verb instead of the participle: He has the gall of a shoplifter who returns an item for a refund. Participles are very often used to replace all manner of subordinate clauses. Some examples:

When turning a corner, I saw a lorry hit a car. (= When I was turning a corner, I saw a lorry hit a car.)

Although living in Spain for years, he didn't learn Spanish very well. (= Although he lived in Spain for years, he didn't learn Spanish very well.)

That's a good car compared with mine. (= That is a good car if it is compared with mine.) Compared is a past participle, not a present participle because the clause is in the passive voice.

He could never see a belt without hitting below it. Hitting is a gerund. This is perhaps the easiest of your sentences for a layman to analyze because without is a preposition and all prepositions must be followed by a gerund. Examples:

He had an opportunity of visiting his uncle. We succeeded in reaching our destination in time. I'm accustomed to getting up early.

Wrestling with words gave me my moments of greatest meaning. Wrestling is a gerund. It is the subject of the clause/sentence. Gave is the finite verb. A present participle cannot act as the subject of a clause. Similar examples:

Swimming is great fun! Reading detective stories was one of his hobbies. Writing letters isn't what I like.

Cheers, CB

Re: decline.

Huevos — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:43:34 GMT

New2grammar
stores and restaurants are seeing sharp decline in sales ...

Just to clarify about the indefinite article: it's OK to say "stores and restaurants see sharp decline in sales" without the article when using the present tense; in fact it has the ring of a newspaper headline. On the other hand when using the gerund not using the article in this context sounds very wrong to me as a native speaker.

Re: dread/dislike

Philip — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:41:40 GMT

Tuongvan

Thank you Mister Micawber , but in my MASTERING AMERICAN GRAMMAR BOOK it says the verb dislike can be followed by either an infinitive or a gerund.

Here is the examples I quote from it:

We dislike to play bridge

We dislike playing bridge

Best wishes

This is obviously one of those cases where a published manual offers something that sounds odd to the ears of some native speakers.

Re: dread/dislike

Tuongvan — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:13:06 GMT

Thank you Mister Micawber , but in my MASTERING AMERICAN GRAMMAR BOOK it says the verb dislike can be followed by either an infinitive or a gerund.

Here is the examples I quote from it:

We dislike to play bridge

We dislike playing bridge

Best wishes

Re: Infinive and Gerund - diffrence : )

CalifJim — Mon, 26 May 2008 04:50:06 GMT

Anonymous
Is there any easy way to remember which situation we have to use "Infinive"(to+verb) or "Gerund" (verb+ing)?

Absolutely not. There is no easy way to remember the grammar of catenative verbs. The following site may help you to get an overview of just how complicated this subject is.

http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Catenative.html