Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Derrek]

This question was on the University Entrance Test. We all know the answer is "living," but I can't explain why it is the correct answer.

Situated at an elevation of 1,350m, the city of Kathmandu, which looks out on the sparkling Himalayas, enjoys a warm climate year-round that makes (B) [living/to live] here pleasant.


The Korean head of our English Department tried to explain that gramatically, the way she learned it, "to live" could be correct. I only know enough jargan to tell her that "living" definately sounds and feels correct.

Why? Thanks.

[peppermint]

It's difficult to explain why something is incorrect, but the only way I can see to use "to live" here:

[Derrek]

I told her that too, but she was looking for a grammatical explanation using English vocabulary like Gerund, etc.... Koreans are so nuts about rules, rules, rules.

I know some of them, but in situations like this I end up sad that all I can offer for an answer is "that's just the way it is."

[baldrick]

Is it not beacuse its written in the present continuous?

[turtlepi1]

I'm not sure why I am responding...I hate this stuff

[visviva]

in regular grammar jargon... "make" (in the sense of "bring about") doesn't normally take a verb (or its infinitive form) as an argument in standard English; it can take the gerund, which often functions as a noun. The only cases where make is commonly followed by a verb are a few fossilized idioms like "make do." That's the most obvious reason why "make" would need to be followed by "it" in the item -- "make" needs a nominal argument, even if the noun in question is a straw dog like "it."

But really... even Chomsky, the greatest syntactician of them all, has come around to the belief that grammar has no linguistic reality. The most important reason not to use the infinitive is that 99.9% of the time the infinitive would not be used. Whether the 0.1% is due to error or to an obscure provision of grammar is largely irrelevant. I think a little consciousness-raising about the statistical nature of language would be preferable to feeding her grammar addiction. Perhaps a gift copy of The Lexical Approach is in order.

[manlyboy]

Gerunds and infinitives are kind of like phrasal verbs in that there are no hard and fast rules as to how we form them, but this is a good article with some general guidelines.

[Wangja]

'cos here "living" is a noun ...

[FUBAR]

living is continous

[Wangja]

I agree: may it ever be thus ....

[turtlepi1]

[Wangja]

I know it's a gerund ... "The living is good"

[rok_the-boat]

I think both are OK and if it was a university test question, the examiner should be shot.

The diference, for me, is found in context (that was probably not supplied). For example, if the person who is saying it presently lives there, then 'living' is the best choice. If the person saying it is trying to sell you a house there, then 'to live' is better.

You can't have grammar without proper context. Also, there is the idiomatic factor - sometimes one just sounds more natural in a given situation, even if it goes against an established rule.

[turtlepi1]

[Derrek]

Thank-you for all of your educated comments.

The question actually had three parts, but I didn't want to confuse anyone by posting the entire thing. The actual whole question was:


(A) [Situating/Situated] at an elevation of 1,350m, the city of Kathmandu, which looks out on the sparkling Himalayas, enjoys a warm climate year-round that makes (B) [living/to live] here pleasant. Kathmandu sits almost in the middle of a basin, forming a square about 5km north-south and 5km east-west. It was the site of the ancient kingdom of Nepal. It is now the capital of Nepal and, as such, the center of (C) [its/it's] government, economy, and culture.

(A) ................. (B) ........ (C)
1. Situated ...... living ...... its
2. Situated ...... to live ...... its
3. Situated ...... living ..... it's
4. Situating ..... to live ...... it's
5. Situation ...... living ...... it's


Correct answer: 1