Search results for 'tag:Speaking English tag:Nouns' matching tags 'Speaking English' and 'Nouns'

Re: gerund or verbal noun with an article?

Crokey — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:30:03 GMT

hi cb, its me again!
how do you feel about possessives before a gerund? "John's singing bothered me". You are constantly told that the possessive should be used before a gerund(unless you are saying something weird and you wish to emphasise the subject of the gerund). However, "John's loud singing bothered me", well "loud" is an adjectival attribute modifying singing, and you will never get an adverb to fit in there. "the correct speaking of the english language is important", "correctly speaking english is important". So, is it fair to say that if you can modify the -ing form with an adjecitval attribute, then it is a verbal noun and not a gerund? "john's singing the national anthem bothered me" "john's loud singing OF the national anthem bothered me", I could hardly have changed the nature of the word "singing" from a gerund in the first instance, to a verbal noun in the second, merely by adding an adjective. Furthermore, if in the first case, "singing" is indeed a verbal noun, should it written as "john's singing of the national anthem" , otherwise, without the preposition "of", singing would be taking the object "the national anthem".

have a nice day!

Re: gerund or verbal noun with an article?

Anonymous — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:54:31 GMT

Hi, Thank you.

You said:

The speaking of English is easy. (A verbal noun and because speaking is a noun, the is posible before it. Even an adjectival attribute can be used: The correct speaking of English is easy.)

Speaking English is easy. (A gerund, which to my mind is neither a verb nor a noun but a little bit of both. The is not possible before a gerund, nor is an adjectival attribute and these two things are a clear sign (to me) that a gerund is not a noun: Correct speaking English is easy. (WRONG!!!)

I agree with you on this but I wonder what is your opinion on this.

This playground is for playing soccer.
This playground is for the playing of soccer.

In this situation, I feel the first sentence pattern is what a person will see more often out there in written form or in verbal situations, but I don't think the second one is wrong. Is it wrong? Both seem to be filling the position of a noun.

Re: gerund or verbal noun with an article?

Cool Breeze — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:32:42 GMT

Anonymous

Why do you think RayH seemed to have said this has to be "the fearful wailing"?

1)He heard a fearful wailing of a dog

I think he said it has to be:
2)He heard the fearful wailing of a dog

I think RayH is correct but I also think no. 1 can be correct under a right situation. I think it would have been better if the sentence had a plural noun after "of" like this:
He heard a fearful wailing of dogs

You'll have to wait for RayH's explanation for his preferences. He heard a fearful wailing of a dog is fine grammatically but it does suggest that you may hear different kinds of wailings of a dog and therefore the sentence may sound odd to some. The plural dogs simply indicates that there were at least two dogs, nothing else. No grammatical difference, really.

Grammatical terms cause confusion even among experts, so you have nothing to worry about! This is because not all grammarians and usage experts use them in the same way. There are people who don't use the term "verbal noun" at all. They regard what I consider a verbal noun as a gerund. Examples:

The speaking of English is easy. (A verbal noun and because speaking is a noun, the is posible before it. Even an adjectival attribute can be used: The correct speaking of English is easy.)

Because there are hardly any inflections in English, there is bound to be occasional confusion as to the exact meaning of every word ending in ing as your example (beginning) in another post shows.

I can't remember what I have written about these things before but if you are interested, you may wish to read these posts that deal with the gerund, verbal nouns and participles and their differences:

subject of gerund gerund v present participle gerund v verbal noun

Re: participle as a subject

Cool Breeze — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:54:02 GMT

Anonymous
You wrote:

To hear is an infinitive, in other words, a verb, not a noun or a pronoun.

Is an infinitive really a verb? Does that mean a gerund is a verb too? I know an infintive like the one you used and a gerund act as a noun.

Please read my reply to CalifJim. Terminology varies. I know - at least I think I know - that in America the gerund is considered a noun. Europe views it differently; it is neither a noun nor a verb, it is a cross between them. All nouns can have an adjectival attribute, gerunds cannot: Correct speaking English is easy. Wrong! A noun cannot have an object, a gerund can: Speaking English is easy.

It's of course fine with me if people consider the gerund a noun, I'm just not used to the idea of a noun taking an object and thus prefer the European view. This is actually quite similar to Europeans' calling words like "my" possessive pronouns, isn't it?

Where I come from infinitives are called verbs, so I call them that. Anyone is free to call them different names if they please.

Re: indefinite article before a gerund

Cool Breeze — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:49:43 GMT

I am not sure if the following answers your question but I'll say it anyway. Some grammarians don't distinguish between verbal nouns (= complete nouns formed from verbs with the ing ending) and gerunds (= words that are neither verbs nor nouns but resemble both to some extent). Some apply the term "gerund" to both of them. Perhaps your confusion arises from that?

A verbal noun really is a noun in that it can assume all the characteristics any countable noun has. This means that it can have an article, an adjectival attribute (or more than just one) and it can occur in the plural:

The correct speaking of English is easy.

His old writings don't interest me.

Perhaps some of the "gerunds" that bother you or arouse your interest belong to this category? Mixing in your post certainly does.

Some verbal nouns have become part and parcel of the language and are included in dictionaries, like "beginning" for example. In some cases you have a choice: a happy end/ending.

Gerunds can't be preceded by an article or an adjectival attribute because they are not full-fledged nouns. They bear some resemblance to verbs: they can take an object:

Speaking English correctly is easy.

What does " charges " here mean ?

Tuongvan — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:24:24 GMT

Dear teachers ,

I read an article written in English on education , and I don't understand the noun " charges " in the sentence below:

" Overcrowded classrooms also mean that students will have little chance to practise listening and speaking English.

As Hanna Floyd says: "Twenty primary-school students is the best class number because the children need to be active during lessons and teachers have to listen carefully to all their charges ".

Please explain to me the meanibg of it . By the way , do you think the clause " Twenty primary-school students is the best class number " is ok ?

Thank you in advance

Re: Some grammar questions

Hoa Thai — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:36:27 GMT

Hoa Thai
Hi,

#1. Since accent is a countable noun, we need 'a' for both heavy accent and heavier accent.
#2. I prefer 'hesitancy in responding'.

Besides the above comments, both sentences have a run-on problem. There are more than one way to reword them; and here is my suggestion:

Student1 had a heavy accent. S/he showed much more hesitancy in responding to the question, and expressed with less confidence than student2.
Student1 had a heavier accent than student2. S/he also showed much more hesitancy in responding to the given question, and expressed with less confidence in speaking English.

Re: Some grammar questions

Hoa Thai — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:17:08 GMT

Hi,

#1. Since accent is a countable noun, we need 'a' for both heavy accent and heavier accent.
#2. I prefer 'hesitancy in responding'.

Besides the above comments, both sentences have a run-on problem. There are more than one way to reword them; and here is my suggestion:

Student1 had a heavy accent. S/he showed much more hesitancy in responding to the question, and expressed less confidence than student2.
Student1 had a heavier accent than student2. S/he also showed muchmore hesitancy in responding to the given question, and expressed lessconfidence in speaking English.

Re: He insisted on my/me singing a song.

Goodman — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:13:46 GMT

Hi,

This is how I was taught. The terminology can be confusing. I was taught that gerund is the noun form of a verb. Although itâ not a real noun by definition, it functions like one. Another confusing aspect of the âingâ form is that, itâs often mixed up with participle and gerund.

i.e. I love my family. Family is a noun. To replace âfamilyâ with dancing, it becomes âI love dancingâ. Therefore, âdancingâ in function is a noun, (a gerund)

On the other hand, â I saw her standing thereâ where standing is a participle, not gerund. Likewise, âI heard the police shouting at the burglar to stop runningâ. Shouting and running are both participles.

With the subjunctive use, âI insisted on his speaking Englishâ, itâs [his], not [him]. But Iâd prefer to say âI insist that he speak Englishâ for that context.

Re: He insisted on my/me singing a song.

Cool Breeze — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:31:40 GMT

Grammar Geek wrote:
Singing is a gerund, a noun, so it takes the possessive my.

This is rather peculiar, I think. I have encountered the same thing on these forums many times. Native speakers say: "A gerund is a noun." Do they teach it that way in American schools and universities? Grammatical terminology varies greatly from country to country but I have yet to meet a grammarian who says a noun can have an object:

I insisted on his speaking English.

Furthermore, all nouns can have an adjectival attribute; in other words, we can put an adjective before them:

He likes old books.
Merry old England fascinates me.
Little Mary wanted to go out.
Useful information was given to everybody.

So, if gerunds are full-fledged nouns, the following is correct:

Correct speaking English is easy.

Few consider it correct. A gerund is neither a noun nor a verb; it's a cross between them. It has some qualities characteristic of nouns and some that are characteristic of verbs. It resembles a verb in that it can take an object, for instance.

Therefore, "I insist on him speaking English" and "I insist on his speaking English" are equally grammatical. In the first sentence, him is used due to the influence of the preposition on, which is normal English grammar. In the second sentence his is used because speaking is a noun to an extent, even though it's not a complete noun. It has long been customary to consider possessive forms (my, his, our) of personal pronouns better than the object forms (me, him, us) as subjects of a gerund. It also used to be common to consider the basic or common form of other words better in this position:

I insist on John Smith speaking English. (Also: John Smith's)
I insist on everybody speaking English. (Rarely: everybody's)

In the past 30 or so years I have noticed a tendency in American magazines and newspapers to prefer the genitive even in cases where it sounds and looks ludicrous. I assume this can be ascribed to rising standards in education. Nevertheless, there has never been a grammatical justification to consider one of the alternatives better. The tendency to consider the possessive form the better seems to me to stem from grammatical ignorance rather than a good knowledge of it. There is no grammatical or historical justification for preferring either form.

Cheers
CB