Re: Dangling

paco2004 — Sun, 05 Dec 2004 09:08:54 GMT

Hello MrP

History of English Gerunds (quoted from OED)

The most notable development of the verbal nouns in form of -ing is its use as a gerund, i.e. a substantive with certain verbal functions, particularly those of being qualified by an adverb instead of an adjective, and of governing an object like a verb: e.g. the habit of speaking loosely (= loose speaking); he has hopes of coming back speedily (= a speedy return); he practises writing (= the writing of)leading articles; engaged in building himself a house (= the building of a house for himself); after having written a letter (= the completion of the writing of a letter).

This gerundial use is peculiar to English, of which it is a characteristic and most important feature; it was unknown to OE. and early ME. The first traces of it as yet pointed out (see R. Blume Ursprung und Entwickelung des Gerundiums im Englischen, Bremen 1880) occur c1340 in the Ayenbite of Inwit and in the writings of Richard Rolle of Hampole, in the separation of the adverbial particles in down-coming, down-falling, in-going, etc., and the placing of it after the verbal nouns, coming down, falling down, going in, as in the finite verb, come down, fall down, go in. This was soon extended to adverbs and adverbial phrases generally, so that it became established that any verbal noun could, like the verb to which it belonged, take an adverbial qualification. In other respects the verbal noun at first retained its noun construction, e.g. c1350 Hampole Prose Tr. (E.E.T.S.) 11âall manere of withd-raweynge of oÃ¾er men thynges wrang-wysely agaynes Ã¾aire wyll Ã¾at aghte itâ.

A generation later, the verbal noun is found with a verbal regimen, thus 1377 Langland P. Pl. B. xiv. 186 âConfessioun and knowlechyng and crauyng Ã¾y mercy shulde amende vsâ; Ibid. xix. 72 âwith-outen mercy askyngeâ. This gerundial construction is very frequent in Wyclif's Bible (1382); and it is significant that he regularly uses it in translating the Latin gerund, while he retains the original substantival construction in rendering a Latin noun of action. Thus, Exod. xix. 1 âthe thridde moneth of the goyng of Yrael out [egressionis] of the loond of Egipteâ; but Heb. xii. 10 âin receyuynge [recipiendo] the halowing of himâ; Mark iii. 15 âpower of heelynge [curandi] siknessis, and of castynge out [ejiciendi] fendisâ. Imitation of the Latin gerund was thus apparently an influential factor in the development of the English gerundial use of the verbal nouns. Another influence may have been the literal rendering of the French gerund (identical in form with the present participle) after , as in , Latin , in coming.

The full development of the gerundial use before 1400 led necessarily to an indefinite increase of verbal nouns in -ing, since every verb now had one as an actual or potential dependent. In conjunction with the formal identity of gerund and present participle, it led also, at a later date, to the introduction of gerundial expressions for the perfect and future tenses, and for the passive voice, coinciding in form with the participles of the same tenses and voices. Thus Sidney Arcadia i. (1725) 68 âwant of consideration in not having demanded thus muchâ; Spenser F.Q. iii. iv. 50 âfeare of being fowly shentâ; Hooker Eccl. Pol. i. xi. Â§2 âby being unto God unitedâ; Shakespeare. Two Gentlemen i. iii. 16 âin hauing knowne no trauaile in his youthâ; Tempest iii. i. 19 â'T will weepe for hauing wearied youâ; Mod. âThe news of his being about to return home, instead of having been slain by the enemyâ.

But, although the gerundial use was fully established by 1400, it was a long time before it was distinctly separated from the earlier substantival use. The verbal noun has the (or equivalent) before it, and of (or equivalent) after it; the gerund has neither. A good example of the two constructions side by side, and with identical sense, occurs in Bacon's third Essay: âConcerning the meanes of procuring unity: men must beware, that in the procuring of religious unity, they doe notâ, etc. But, down to the 17th c., mixed constructions were frequent, in which the word in -ing had an adjectival qualification with a verbal regimen, or, conversely, an adverbial qualification with the construction of a noun followed by of: thus Sidney Arcadia i. iv. 15b, âto fall to a sodain straitning themâ; Ibid. i. xii. 56b, âby the well choosing of your commandementsâ.

The gerund still retains one feature of the verbal noun, viz. that of admitting of a preceding possessive case or possessive pronoun, as in âafter John's behaving so strangelyâ, âupon my readily granting itâ. In the literary language this construction is regularly retained with a pronoun, and very generally with a single personal substantive; but, with names of things, and phraseological or involved denominations, the sign of the possessive began to be dropped already by 1600; thus Shakespeare Macbeth i. iii. 44 âBy each at once her choppie finger laying vpon her skinnie lipsâ. No other treatment is now possible in such constructions as âin default of one or other being acceptedâ, âon the general and his staff appearingâ, âin the event of your expectations not being at once realizedâ, âin consequence of much snow having fallenâ; and, in current spoken English, the 's is commonly omitted with all nouns: thus Thackeray Van. Fair xi. 348 âI insist upon Miss Sharp appearingâ, where âMiss Sharp'sâ would now sound pedantic or archaic. Even a pronoun standing before the gerund is put in the objective, in dialect speech; and, when the pronoun is emphatic, this is common in ordinary colloquial English; thus Thackeray Esmond I. 242 âPapa did not care about them learningâ; ---Newcomes âBut who ever heard of them eating an owl?â Chas. Reade Hard Cash (1863) II. 332 âThat is no excuse for him beating you.â So âWhat is the use of me speaking?â

In such constructions the objective noun or pronoun seems to stand in simple apposition to the gerund, the two forming a kind of combined object of the preposition, reminding us of the Greek infinitive with an accusative after a preposition, as in Âµeta t? pa?ada???a? t?? ??a???? âafter John being delivered upâ. But in English there has probably been analogical influence from the construction of the present participle: cf., for instance, âJohn was digging potatoesâ, âWho saw John digging potatoes?â, and âWho ever heard of John (= John's) digging potatoes?â

paco

Re: Earlier/before

CalifJim — Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:14:36 GMT

I have the same reaction as you do, Taka. "earlier" has the implicit comparison "earlier than you actually did"; "before" does not. "before" leaves me asking "before what?"

Changing to "later /"after":

I have no time to do it now; I'll do it later. (later than now)
I have no time to do it now; I'll do it after. (after what???)

The spatial analogy might be:

If you had gone closer, you would have seen it.
If you had gone near, you would have seen it.

In the first, the comparative form in "er" invites "closer to it than you actually did", whereas in the second, "near" only invites the question "near what?".

In all these cases the non-comparative forms act like prepositions which are missing their (required, apparently!) objects.

ps "after" looks suspiciously like it was originally "more aft" in the early history of English, but no one nowadays conceives of it as a comparative form.

Search results for 'tag:Prepositions tag:History of English' matching tags 'Prepositions' and 'History of English'

Re: Dangling

Re: Earlier/before