Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Grammar question (cont)
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 3:07 pm    Post subject: Grammar question (cont) Reply with quote

A post from yesterday stated: "sense verbs+object+simple form," as in, "I saw a man walk by."

Fair enough, but my question is, what is "looking" in this sentence from a famous children's book? "I see a brown bear looking at me.

Is it an object complement, and therefore a gerund? Is it an adjective, and therefore a participle, or is it being used progressively with the relative pronoun and aux. verb ommited [ie, I see a brown bear (that is) looking at me). According to the post from yesterday, it should read' "I see a brown bear look at me(?)"

This has been bugging me for a little while and I would love to clear it up.

thank you for your help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to "OWL", the idea that the verb "see" + an object must be followed by the simple form of a verb is totally bogus. In fact, it can be followed by either a gerund or a bare infinitive, with the difference being that sometimes the gerund indicates a continuous action, while the bare infintive (simple/base form) can indicate a one time action.

She saw them jumping on the bed. (continuous action)
She saw them jump on the bed. (one-time action)

However, just to be clear, they both can refer to continuous action.

We watched him playing basketball. (continuous action)
We watched him play basketball. (continuous action)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to "OWL", the idea that the verb "see" + an object must be followed by the simple form of a verb is totally bogus. In fact, it can be followed by either a gerund or a bare infinitive, with the difference being that sometimes the gerund indicates a continuous action, while the bare infintive (simple/base form) can indicate a one time action.

She saw them jumping on the bed. (continuous action)
She saw them jump on the bed. (one-time action)

However, just to be clear, they both can refer to continuous action.

We watched him playing basketball. (continuous action)
We watched him play basketball. (continuous action)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suneater



Joined: 04 Dec 2007

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Grammar question (cont) Reply with quote

meangradin wrote:
A post from yesterday stated: "sense verbs+object+simple form," as in, "I saw a man walk by."

Fair enough, but my question is, what is "looking" in this sentence from a famous children's book? "I see a brown bear looking at me.

Is it an object complement, and therefore a gerund? Is it an adjective, and therefore a participle, or is it being used progressively with the relative pronoun and aux. verb ommited [ie, I see a brown bear (that is) looking at me). According to the post from yesterday, it should read' "I see a brown bear look at me(?)"

This has been bugging me for a little while and I would love to clear it up.

thank you for your help.


It's a present participle non-finite clause.

I'm not sure if it is the complement because I thought that complements were syntactically obligatory, meaning that they are needed to complete a clause or phrase.

However, I could be proven wrong by a number of posters with more grammar nous than I have. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree that it is most probably a participle, as it seems to be acting more like a modifier; however, it does not make sense when you try to transform in to the usual adjective-noun position (a looking bear?)

As for it being an object complement, I don't think gerunds can act this way. They clearly can be subject complements, but I can not find an example of them acting as object complements; so strike that one.

What is clear to me; contemporary grammarians seem to have a distain for the "gerund" label, as the line between a gerund and a participle can be unclear in English, compared to Latin. Hence, the use of the "gerund-particple label.

To make a long story short, I need to go back to school!

PS, where is Woland (sp?) when I need him?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hanson



Joined: 20 Oct 2004

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A1 - I saw him look at me = a glance, a short action that occurred and is now finished. Nothing to be worried about, right?

A2 - I saw him looking at me = a longer period of time, a continuous action over time. In this example, it would suggest a creepy guy leering at the speaker of this sentence. The action may or may not have been finished.

B1 - I saw him eat an apple = suggests a completed action, the apple is gone now. The whole action was witnessed by the speaker of this sentence.

B2 - I saw him eating an apple = continuous action, but it does not suggest that the action was finished, or that the speaker witnessed the action all the way through to its completion. It is possible to assume, in this case, that for a continuous period of time, the speaker witnessed the action, but did not necessarily see it through to its full end.

Make sense?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Hanson, but the original question was what is the "ing" verbal; a gerund or a participle?

Any thoughts on that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cbclark4



Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you may be overthinking that.

I think you overthought that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Vicissitude



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

meangradin wrote:
Thanks Hanson, but the original question was what is the "ing" verbal; a gerund or a participle?

Any thoughts on that?


Quote:
"I see a brown bear looking at me.

In this case, looking is a gerund. There is an -ing clause and the object is "me." A participle functions as an adjective and in this case the word is definately a verb.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meangradin



Joined: 10 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"In this case, looking is a gerund. There is an -ing clause and the object is "me." A participle functions as an adjective and in this case the word is definately a verb."

However, a gerund is only ever a noun, not a verb. A participle can be a verb when used in the progressive tense ( the bear is looking at me). Of course, here there is no "be" verb, so again, I am uncertain how "looking" functions in the sentence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suneater



Joined: 04 Dec 2007

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

meangradin wrote:
Thanks Hanson, but the original question was what is the "ing" verbal; a gerund or a participle?

Any thoughts on that?


I've noticed that most of my linguistics books don't even mention the term 'gerund' anymore, although my trusted grammar books still devote a page or two to the term.

Personally, I don't think we need to use the term 'gerund'. Instead, I'd rather see nominalisation as a particular facet of the multifiunctional present participle.

Anyway...I think we have to look at the word preceding the -ing form. If it is a possessive construction, the -ing functions as would a noun. If it is a noun (or pronoun) then the -ing functions as a fused participle.

Ex:

    (1) Through the thin wall, I could hear his sobbing. (sobbing functions as a noun)
    (2) Through the thin wall, I could hear him sobbing. (sobbing functions as a fused participle) hmmm...on reflection, 'sobbing' in (2) is probably just a non-finite postmodifier as the sentence more likely refers to a singular event rather than a generalisation - still a participle, though!

It seems that (1) disposesses the act(ion) of any agent, thus emphasising "sobbing, whereas (2) seems to broaden its focus to include the poor sad man Smile


So...to round it up...I don't think we need a term such as 'gerund'...and anything goes in English!


Last edited by suneater on Tue Feb 12, 2008 12:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hanson



Joined: 20 Oct 2004

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vicissitude wrote:
meangradin wrote:
Thanks Hanson, but the original question was what is the "ing" verbal; a gerund or a participle?

Any thoughts on that?


Quote:
"I see a brown bear looking at me.

In this case, looking is a gerund. There is an -ing clause and the object is "me." A participle functions as an adjective and in this case the word is definately a verb.


I would say it's a particple, as in "the bear is looking at me", with "is" omitted. Wouldn't a "gerund" suggest it is being used as a noun, as in "debating with Vicissitude will certainly lead to name-calling". Here, both "debating" and "name-calling" are gerunds in the true sense of a gerund.

Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GreenlightmeansGO



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Location: Daegu

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grammar was much easier when I didn't care so much.

Yeah, from what I've read it looks like Vic's post is correct. It's a gerund.

The full explanation: 'the bear looking at me' acts as a noun (it is the object of 'saw'), therefore 'looking' is a gerund...
BUT, in the bounds of the 'dependent' clause, 'looking' acts as a participle.

There's a good chance I said something misleading. If you know better, please do share your knowledge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
suneater



Joined: 04 Dec 2007

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GreenlightmeansGO wrote:
Grammar was much easier when I didn't care so much.

Yeah, from what I've read it looks like Vic's post is correct. It's a gerund.

The full explanation: 'the bear looking at me' acts as a noun (it is the object of 'saw'), therefore 'looking' is a gerund...
BUT, in the bounds of the 'dependent' clause, 'looking' acts as a participle.

There's a good chance I said something misleading. If you know better, please do share your knowledge.


nope, 'looking' is not a gerund. It is neither a direct nor an indirect object of the verb 'saw'. Rather 'looking (at me)' is a post-modifiying participle phrase that is entirely subordinate to the subject 'I' and its predicate 'saw the bear'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vicissitude



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

meangradin wrote:
"In this case, looking is a gerund. There is an -ing clause and the object is "me." A participle functions as an adjective and in this case the word is definately a verb."

However, a gerund is only ever a noun, not a verb. A participle can be a verb when used in the progressive tense ( the bear is looking at me). Of course, here there is no "be" verb, so again, I am uncertain how "looking" functions in the sentence.


Quote:
Definition: Traditionally, "gerund" is the term used to refer to a certain Latin verb form that could function as a noun.
Nowadays, the term generally is used to refer to the present participle in English and the verbal present participle of Spanish. These are the verb forms that end in '-ing" in English and -ando or -endo in Spanish. In both languages, the gerund is used to form the progressive or continuous tenses. Note that while the English gerund can be and frequently is used a noun, the Spanish gerund does not function as a noun.)

Some grammarians also use the term "gerund" more loosely to refer to any verb form when it is functioning as a noun. Generally, you should not assume this definition is meant unless the context makes clear this is what is intended.

Also Known As: Gerundio in Spanish when referring to the verbal present participle.
Examples: Boldfaced terms are gerunds: I am thinking about you. (Estoy pensando en ti.) Seeing is believing. (Ver es creer. Note that the gerund is not used in Spanish here.) He went away crying. (Se fue llorando.) I need a working car. (Necesito un coche que funciona. Note that the gerund is not used in Spanish here.)

http://spanish.about.com/cs/verbs/g/gerundgl.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International