Discussion:
Are gerunds participles?
(too old to reply)
Markus Appel
2006-12-02 16:31:06 UTC
Permalink
I don't remember where I read it, but I think it was in this group where
somebody wrote that gerunds belong to the group of (present)
participles, meaning that -ing forms are the same as present participles
and gerunds are only a specific group of participles that are
functioning as nouns. I strongly doubt that but I would love to get some
more information on the genesis of participles and gerunds or the -ing
form in general. Are there any good websites? I didn't really find
anything on google etc.

Thanks
Markus
Robert Lieblich
2006-12-02 16:48:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Markus Appel
I don't remember where I read it, but I think it was in this group where
somebody wrote that gerunds belong to the group of (present)
participles, meaning that -ing forms are the same as present participles
and gerunds are only a specific group of participles that are
functioning as nouns. I strongly doubt that but I would love to get some
more information on the genesis of participles and gerunds or the -ing
form in general. Are there any good websites? I didn't really find
anything on google etc.
I'd like to statt you off with some commentary on the usage of the
terms "present participle" and "gerund." That comment is: These
usages have not been standardized, and different people use them to
mean different things. To some the "present participle" is a form --
any verb stem ending in "ing" is a present participle without regard
to its use in a given context, simply because it has the form of a
verb stem ending in "ing." Others use the term "ing form," which I
think is reasonably clear, although an occasional smartass will ask
whether "thing," for example, is an "ing form." The point is that we
can't even agree on what the name of the *form* us.

When it comes to the use, things get even sloppier. Consider the
sentence "I like driving." Some people will call "driving" a present
participle used as a noun, some a present participle used as a gerund,
some just a gerund, and some deny it even gerund-ness, calling it
simply a noun like other nouns. That last group will then look at the
sentence "I like driving trucks" and say that this time "driving" is a
gerund because it partakes of verbness by having a direct object. I'm
not here to tell you which group is right and which is wrong. What
I'm trying to do is warn you of this inconsistent terminology, because
otherwise you may become terminally confused before you understand the
extent to which different people mean different things by the same
label.

And what of "I was driving down the street"? It's a usage in the
progressive (or continuous) aspect, but is "driving" a participle
there or not? It depends -- and I'm not being facetious -- on what
the meaning of "is" is. It's part of a progressive form. Is it still
a "participle"? That depends on who you ask.

John Lawler has written something that may help get you started:
<http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/gerund.html>. Beyond
that, it's a quagmire. Good luck.
--
Bob Lieblich
Driving to distraction
Markus Appel
2006-12-03 13:12:18 UTC
Permalink
Thank you for your elaborate explanation. Things are getting clearer to
me (if that is possible at all with this subject).
Markus
Tom Peel
2006-12-03 23:27:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Markus Appel
Thank you for your elaborate explanation. Things are getting clearer to
me (if that is possible at all with this subject).
Markus
There's a good article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerund. One
thing that distinguishes a gerund from a participle is that a gerund can
be used with a possesive adjective.

Example:
I appreciate his driving me home.

The same with a participle:
I appreciate him driving me home.

There is a very subtle difference in meaning. In the case of the
gerund, the object of the verb "appreciate" is "driving", in the second
case using the participle, the object of the verb "appreciate" is "him",
although in everyday speech the distinction is frequently lost.

T.

Loading...