What is a gerund? A noun or a verb? 'His smoking upset me’
I've been studying the Huddleston and Pullum book for four months now. So far only one thing confuses me: the identity of gerund. Is it a noun or a verb?
- His constant smoking upset me. smoking seems noun because of adjective constant.
- Him/His constantly smoking upset me. smoking seems to be verb because of adverb constantly.
- Him/His smoking cigars upset me. smoking seems to be a verb because of object cigars.
"His smoking upset me." So is this smoking gerund a noun or verb? Because there is no differentiation, is it both verb and noun? Maybe it's new word category?
Also his seems to be both sometimes a subject and at other times a possessive determiner. Is that correct?
grammar terminology gerunds
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
|
show 11 more comments
I've been studying the Huddleston and Pullum book for four months now. So far only one thing confuses me: the identity of gerund. Is it a noun or a verb?
- His constant smoking upset me. smoking seems noun because of adjective constant.
- Him/His constantly smoking upset me. smoking seems to be verb because of adverb constantly.
- Him/His smoking cigars upset me. smoking seems to be a verb because of object cigars.
"His smoking upset me." So is this smoking gerund a noun or verb? Because there is no differentiation, is it both verb and noun? Maybe it's new word category?
Also his seems to be both sometimes a subject and at other times a possessive determiner. Is that correct?
grammar terminology gerunds
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
4
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
1
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
1
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
1
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
1
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53
|
show 11 more comments
I've been studying the Huddleston and Pullum book for four months now. So far only one thing confuses me: the identity of gerund. Is it a noun or a verb?
- His constant smoking upset me. smoking seems noun because of adjective constant.
- Him/His constantly smoking upset me. smoking seems to be verb because of adverb constantly.
- Him/His smoking cigars upset me. smoking seems to be a verb because of object cigars.
"His smoking upset me." So is this smoking gerund a noun or verb? Because there is no differentiation, is it both verb and noun? Maybe it's new word category?
Also his seems to be both sometimes a subject and at other times a possessive determiner. Is that correct?
grammar terminology gerunds
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
I've been studying the Huddleston and Pullum book for four months now. So far only one thing confuses me: the identity of gerund. Is it a noun or a verb?
- His constant smoking upset me. smoking seems noun because of adjective constant.
- Him/His constantly smoking upset me. smoking seems to be verb because of adverb constantly.
- Him/His smoking cigars upset me. smoking seems to be a verb because of object cigars.
"His smoking upset me." So is this smoking gerund a noun or verb? Because there is no differentiation, is it both verb and noun? Maybe it's new word category?
Also his seems to be both sometimes a subject and at other times a possessive determiner. Is that correct?
grammar terminology gerunds
grammar terminology gerunds
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
edited Dec 9 '14 at 1:24
Araucaria
35.5k1071149
35.5k1071149
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
asked Oct 30 '14 at 13:23
The Beefer FanThe Beefer Fan
3673619
3673619
4
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
1
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
1
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
1
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
1
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53
|
show 11 more comments
4
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
1
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
1
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
1
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
1
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53
4
4
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
1
1
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
1
1
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
1
1
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
1
1
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53
|
show 11 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
I'm a bit astonished about the long discussions in the post How can I prove a word is a noun? I admit that there a certain problems, especially with gerunds.
- Smoking cigarettes is unhealty.
In this example, containing a gerund with an object, it is indeed a bit difficult to say to which word class "smoking" belongs. Is it a noun or a verb?
Traditionally the gerund is seen as a verb form with a double nature. It can behave as a noun and as a verb.
I think it would be practical to see the gerund also as a special word class, a noun-verb thing. In this way we could avoid a lot of problems that arise about the word class noun when we come across gerunds with objects.
My question: Would it be practical to see gerunds as a word class of its own?
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
add a comment |
His/Him are not interchangeable here.
His is possessive. The following are all nouns, and smoking is a gerund because it is a noun formed from a verb by adding 'ing':
His smoking upset me.
His attitude annoyed me.
His
thoughtfulness pleased me.
It's like a trait or quality that he has, the fact that he smokes.
On the other hand Him smoking upset me means that it was the 'doing' part of smoking which was upsetting.
Him [sitting there] smoking [while I had the children with me] upset
me.
So here I would say it was a verb. I don't know what part of grammar him is here, but there are lots of very knowledgeable people on this site who probably know.
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
|
show 2 more comments
Using old-school terminology I'd say that not every verb ending with -ing is a gerund.
- His constant smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a deverbal noun - His constantly smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a gerund - Him smoking cigars upset me.
'smoking' is present participl.
Thus we have gerund in one case only.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Since you mentioned Huddleston and Pullum, this answer will be based on the terminology that they use. Huddleston and Pullum use the term "gerund-participle" instead of "gerund" because they reject the traditional distinction between gerunds and present participles.
The gerund-participle is a verb form. It is not a noun. A clause headed by a gerund-participle can be used like a noun phrase (NP) in that it can function as the subject of a clause, or the complement of a verb or of a preposition.
Words ending in -ing can belong to various parts of speech: they can be
verbs (in the gerund-participle form)
nouns (deverbal nouns such as "building" or "thinking" in "a building" or "good thinking")
adjectives (deverbal/departicipial adjectives such as "exciting" in "very exciting")
prepositions (e.g. "during" in "I worked for a number of years, during which I met many different kinds of people")
Sometimes words of different categories can be used in the same kind of grammatical context. For example, in the context "It is ____", the blank space could be filled with a verb in the gerund-participle form, or it could be filled with an adjective. The fact that a gerund-participle clause can be used the same contexts as a noun phrase does not mean that a gerund "is a noun". See Araucaria's answer to "How can I prove a word is a noun?" for more detailed discussion of this point.
Of course, there are different approaches to grammar. There may be some definitions of "noun" for which it makes sense to categorize a gerund as a noun, but it's not a noun according to Huddleston and Pullum's definition.
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205390%2fwhat-is-a-gerund-a-noun-or-a-verb-his-smoking-upset-me%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I'm a bit astonished about the long discussions in the post How can I prove a word is a noun? I admit that there a certain problems, especially with gerunds.
- Smoking cigarettes is unhealty.
In this example, containing a gerund with an object, it is indeed a bit difficult to say to which word class "smoking" belongs. Is it a noun or a verb?
Traditionally the gerund is seen as a verb form with a double nature. It can behave as a noun and as a verb.
I think it would be practical to see the gerund also as a special word class, a noun-verb thing. In this way we could avoid a lot of problems that arise about the word class noun when we come across gerunds with objects.
My question: Would it be practical to see gerunds as a word class of its own?
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm a bit astonished about the long discussions in the post How can I prove a word is a noun? I admit that there a certain problems, especially with gerunds.
- Smoking cigarettes is unhealty.
In this example, containing a gerund with an object, it is indeed a bit difficult to say to which word class "smoking" belongs. Is it a noun or a verb?
Traditionally the gerund is seen as a verb form with a double nature. It can behave as a noun and as a verb.
I think it would be practical to see the gerund also as a special word class, a noun-verb thing. In this way we could avoid a lot of problems that arise about the word class noun when we come across gerunds with objects.
My question: Would it be practical to see gerunds as a word class of its own?
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm a bit astonished about the long discussions in the post How can I prove a word is a noun? I admit that there a certain problems, especially with gerunds.
- Smoking cigarettes is unhealty.
In this example, containing a gerund with an object, it is indeed a bit difficult to say to which word class "smoking" belongs. Is it a noun or a verb?
Traditionally the gerund is seen as a verb form with a double nature. It can behave as a noun and as a verb.
I think it would be practical to see the gerund also as a special word class, a noun-verb thing. In this way we could avoid a lot of problems that arise about the word class noun when we come across gerunds with objects.
My question: Would it be practical to see gerunds as a word class of its own?
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
I'm a bit astonished about the long discussions in the post How can I prove a word is a noun? I admit that there a certain problems, especially with gerunds.
- Smoking cigarettes is unhealty.
In this example, containing a gerund with an object, it is indeed a bit difficult to say to which word class "smoking" belongs. Is it a noun or a verb?
Traditionally the gerund is seen as a verb form with a double nature. It can behave as a noun and as a verb.
I think it would be practical to see the gerund also as a special word class, a noun-verb thing. In this way we could avoid a lot of problems that arise about the word class noun when we come across gerunds with objects.
My question: Would it be practical to see gerunds as a word class of its own?
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38
Community♦
1
1
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
answered Feb 24 '15 at 8:29
rogermuerogermue
11.9k41749
11.9k41749
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
Are you making up your own grammar of today's standard English?
– F.E.
Feb 24 '15 at 9:23
1
1
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
Why don't you post that as a question? It would give us some interesting posts!!!
– Araucaria
Feb 24 '15 at 11:16
1
1
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
@F.E. - Yes, I do have my own grammar because it must fit for a whole group of languages and because the traditional description of language is in my view cumbersome, to say the least. But that is my private affair und I don't use my grammar notation here. - But seeing the endless discussions about the definition of a noun and a simple checking procedure that all center around gerunds I find it reasonable to separate the gerund problem from the word class noun and see it as a separate word class. Grammar is in constant movement. And by the way, it was a question or a suggestion.
– rogermue
Feb 24 '15 at 15:23
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
"Smoking cigarettes is unhealthy." When you ask is "smoking" a noun or a verb, why do you call it a gerund if a gerund is supposed to be a noun? I would call that form of word the present participle, that would allow for both, but doesn't specify one or the other.
– Zebrafish
13 hours ago
add a comment |
His/Him are not interchangeable here.
His is possessive. The following are all nouns, and smoking is a gerund because it is a noun formed from a verb by adding 'ing':
His smoking upset me.
His attitude annoyed me.
His
thoughtfulness pleased me.
It's like a trait or quality that he has, the fact that he smokes.
On the other hand Him smoking upset me means that it was the 'doing' part of smoking which was upsetting.
Him [sitting there] smoking [while I had the children with me] upset
me.
So here I would say it was a verb. I don't know what part of grammar him is here, but there are lots of very knowledgeable people on this site who probably know.
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
|
show 2 more comments
His/Him are not interchangeable here.
His is possessive. The following are all nouns, and smoking is a gerund because it is a noun formed from a verb by adding 'ing':
His smoking upset me.
His attitude annoyed me.
His
thoughtfulness pleased me.
It's like a trait or quality that he has, the fact that he smokes.
On the other hand Him smoking upset me means that it was the 'doing' part of smoking which was upsetting.
Him [sitting there] smoking [while I had the children with me] upset
me.
So here I would say it was a verb. I don't know what part of grammar him is here, but there are lots of very knowledgeable people on this site who probably know.
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
|
show 2 more comments
His/Him are not interchangeable here.
His is possessive. The following are all nouns, and smoking is a gerund because it is a noun formed from a verb by adding 'ing':
His smoking upset me.
His attitude annoyed me.
His
thoughtfulness pleased me.
It's like a trait or quality that he has, the fact that he smokes.
On the other hand Him smoking upset me means that it was the 'doing' part of smoking which was upsetting.
Him [sitting there] smoking [while I had the children with me] upset
me.
So here I would say it was a verb. I don't know what part of grammar him is here, but there are lots of very knowledgeable people on this site who probably know.
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
His/Him are not interchangeable here.
His is possessive. The following are all nouns, and smoking is a gerund because it is a noun formed from a verb by adding 'ing':
His smoking upset me.
His attitude annoyed me.
His
thoughtfulness pleased me.
It's like a trait or quality that he has, the fact that he smokes.
On the other hand Him smoking upset me means that it was the 'doing' part of smoking which was upsetting.
Him [sitting there] smoking [while I had the children with me] upset
me.
So here I would say it was a verb. I don't know what part of grammar him is here, but there are lots of very knowledgeable people on this site who probably know.
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
edited Oct 30 '14 at 14:02
Neeku
3,09442441
3,09442441
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
answered Oct 30 '14 at 13:52
MynamiteMynamite
6,26911630
6,26911630
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
|
show 2 more comments
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
1
1
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
I'm sorry but I think this is not correct.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 30 '14 at 15:11
1
1
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
@TheBeeferFan Would you like to explain why?
– Mynamite
Oct 30 '14 at 16:01
1
1
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
I am sorry my friend. Acording to grammar book Pullum and Huddlestone, in non-finite participial clauses there is choice of his (genitive) or him (accusative) for subject of this clause. So we can say "Him smoking upset me." or "His smoking upset me." So his and him are interchangeable. genitive is more formal.
– The Beefer Fan
Oct 31 '14 at 13:06
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@TheBeeferFan I agree that both words can be used, but they are not interchangeable, they mean different things as I tried to explain in my answer. How can a genitive be used in the same way as an accusative? 'This is his coat.' 'This is him coat'. It doesn't work. So you can say 'Him constantly smoking upset me' (accusative/adverb/verb) but this would have to be 'His constant smoking upset me' (genitive/adjective/gerund noun).
– Mynamite
Oct 31 '14 at 16:08
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
@Mynamite But actual usage doesn't back up your claim there, it seems to me. The theory has to fit the actual usage, not the other way around ... :)
– Araucaria
Nov 8 '14 at 12:27
|
show 2 more comments
Using old-school terminology I'd say that not every verb ending with -ing is a gerund.
- His constant smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a deverbal noun - His constantly smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a gerund - Him smoking cigars upset me.
'smoking' is present participl.
Thus we have gerund in one case only.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Using old-school terminology I'd say that not every verb ending with -ing is a gerund.
- His constant smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a deverbal noun - His constantly smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a gerund - Him smoking cigars upset me.
'smoking' is present participl.
Thus we have gerund in one case only.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Using old-school terminology I'd say that not every verb ending with -ing is a gerund.
- His constant smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a deverbal noun - His constantly smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a gerund - Him smoking cigars upset me.
'smoking' is present participl.
Thus we have gerund in one case only.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Using old-school terminology I'd say that not every verb ending with -ing is a gerund.
- His constant smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a deverbal noun - His constantly smoking upset me.
'smoking' is a gerund - Him smoking cigars upset me.
'smoking' is present participl.
Thus we have gerund in one case only.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
answered 13 hours ago
shuhshuhshuhshuh
1
1
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
shuhshuh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
You're right that deverbal nouns exist, like in several readings of the same book, but how do you explain using him as the sentence subject if the third one is a participle? You cannot. Therefore him is merely the subject of the non finite clause, not of the finite one as that is forbidden. There is no participle the way there arguable is when you've got a smoldering campfire smoking after a wind kicks it up.
– tchrist♦
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Since you mentioned Huddleston and Pullum, this answer will be based on the terminology that they use. Huddleston and Pullum use the term "gerund-participle" instead of "gerund" because they reject the traditional distinction between gerunds and present participles.
The gerund-participle is a verb form. It is not a noun. A clause headed by a gerund-participle can be used like a noun phrase (NP) in that it can function as the subject of a clause, or the complement of a verb or of a preposition.
Words ending in -ing can belong to various parts of speech: they can be
verbs (in the gerund-participle form)
nouns (deverbal nouns such as "building" or "thinking" in "a building" or "good thinking")
adjectives (deverbal/departicipial adjectives such as "exciting" in "very exciting")
prepositions (e.g. "during" in "I worked for a number of years, during which I met many different kinds of people")
Sometimes words of different categories can be used in the same kind of grammatical context. For example, in the context "It is ____", the blank space could be filled with a verb in the gerund-participle form, or it could be filled with an adjective. The fact that a gerund-participle clause can be used the same contexts as a noun phrase does not mean that a gerund "is a noun". See Araucaria's answer to "How can I prove a word is a noun?" for more detailed discussion of this point.
Of course, there are different approaches to grammar. There may be some definitions of "noun" for which it makes sense to categorize a gerund as a noun, but it's not a noun according to Huddleston and Pullum's definition.
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
add a comment |
Since you mentioned Huddleston and Pullum, this answer will be based on the terminology that they use. Huddleston and Pullum use the term "gerund-participle" instead of "gerund" because they reject the traditional distinction between gerunds and present participles.
The gerund-participle is a verb form. It is not a noun. A clause headed by a gerund-participle can be used like a noun phrase (NP) in that it can function as the subject of a clause, or the complement of a verb or of a preposition.
Words ending in -ing can belong to various parts of speech: they can be
verbs (in the gerund-participle form)
nouns (deverbal nouns such as "building" or "thinking" in "a building" or "good thinking")
adjectives (deverbal/departicipial adjectives such as "exciting" in "very exciting")
prepositions (e.g. "during" in "I worked for a number of years, during which I met many different kinds of people")
Sometimes words of different categories can be used in the same kind of grammatical context. For example, in the context "It is ____", the blank space could be filled with a verb in the gerund-participle form, or it could be filled with an adjective. The fact that a gerund-participle clause can be used the same contexts as a noun phrase does not mean that a gerund "is a noun". See Araucaria's answer to "How can I prove a word is a noun?" for more detailed discussion of this point.
Of course, there are different approaches to grammar. There may be some definitions of "noun" for which it makes sense to categorize a gerund as a noun, but it's not a noun according to Huddleston and Pullum's definition.
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
add a comment |
Since you mentioned Huddleston and Pullum, this answer will be based on the terminology that they use. Huddleston and Pullum use the term "gerund-participle" instead of "gerund" because they reject the traditional distinction between gerunds and present participles.
The gerund-participle is a verb form. It is not a noun. A clause headed by a gerund-participle can be used like a noun phrase (NP) in that it can function as the subject of a clause, or the complement of a verb or of a preposition.
Words ending in -ing can belong to various parts of speech: they can be
verbs (in the gerund-participle form)
nouns (deverbal nouns such as "building" or "thinking" in "a building" or "good thinking")
adjectives (deverbal/departicipial adjectives such as "exciting" in "very exciting")
prepositions (e.g. "during" in "I worked for a number of years, during which I met many different kinds of people")
Sometimes words of different categories can be used in the same kind of grammatical context. For example, in the context "It is ____", the blank space could be filled with a verb in the gerund-participle form, or it could be filled with an adjective. The fact that a gerund-participle clause can be used the same contexts as a noun phrase does not mean that a gerund "is a noun". See Araucaria's answer to "How can I prove a word is a noun?" for more detailed discussion of this point.
Of course, there are different approaches to grammar. There may be some definitions of "noun" for which it makes sense to categorize a gerund as a noun, but it's not a noun according to Huddleston and Pullum's definition.
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
Since you mentioned Huddleston and Pullum, this answer will be based on the terminology that they use. Huddleston and Pullum use the term "gerund-participle" instead of "gerund" because they reject the traditional distinction between gerunds and present participles.
The gerund-participle is a verb form. It is not a noun. A clause headed by a gerund-participle can be used like a noun phrase (NP) in that it can function as the subject of a clause, or the complement of a verb or of a preposition.
Words ending in -ing can belong to various parts of speech: they can be
verbs (in the gerund-participle form)
nouns (deverbal nouns such as "building" or "thinking" in "a building" or "good thinking")
adjectives (deverbal/departicipial adjectives such as "exciting" in "very exciting")
prepositions (e.g. "during" in "I worked for a number of years, during which I met many different kinds of people")
Sometimes words of different categories can be used in the same kind of grammatical context. For example, in the context "It is ____", the blank space could be filled with a verb in the gerund-participle form, or it could be filled with an adjective. The fact that a gerund-participle clause can be used the same contexts as a noun phrase does not mean that a gerund "is a noun". See Araucaria's answer to "How can I prove a word is a noun?" for more detailed discussion of this point.
Of course, there are different approaches to grammar. There may be some definitions of "noun" for which it makes sense to categorize a gerund as a noun, but it's not a noun according to Huddleston and Pullum's definition.
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
edited 12 hours ago
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
answered 12 hours ago
sumelicsumelic
49.6k8116223
49.6k8116223
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205390%2fwhat-is-a-gerund-a-noun-or-a-verb-his-smoking-upset-me%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
I think it's General Reference that a gerund is an English noun formed from a verb by adding -ing. And in OP's example "His smoking upset me" it's obvious smoking is a noun, since it's being used as the subject of the verb to upset. So it must be a gerund.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:30
1
Before I visited this site, I would have told you a gerund is a "noun with the force of a verb", but now I don't think that's true; and in fact, I think I once read our resident professor of English and grammar, @John Lawler, argue that a gerund is neither a noun nor a verb, but a fiction. Can't seem to find that post now, though.
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:32
1
Oh, and here's a whole long thing by John on the topic of gerunds, offsite. Sufficient and high-quality material for an answer, if anyone wants to take a swing at it (not me, I don't pretend to know how to spell grammar).
– Dan Bron
Oct 30 '14 at 13:38
1
John also says I would say chickens in The catching of the chickens was hard work is just a noun, not a gerund, whence the article; but in Catching chickens was hard work, it's the verb in a gerund complement construction. Presumably he meant I would say catching..., not chickens, but his point there is an obscure level of detail not relevant to OP here.
– FumbleFingers
Oct 30 '14 at 13:43
1
Sigh - This is what happens when you go on vacation. If it ends with -ing and it's got a direct object, it's a verb and therefore a gerund. If it ends with -ing and it takes an article, it's a noun and therefore not a gerund. A Gerund is a construction using the -ing form of the verb. It's the verb of a certain type of subordinate clause (a "gerund clause" or "gerund phrase") that appears in some constructions, usually governed by the matrix verb, of which the gerund clause is usually the object or, less commonly, the subject. I.e, it's a noun clause; that's the confusion.
– John Lawler
Dec 9 '14 at 1:53