Easier way to teach V-ing vs to+infinitive
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Do you detect a sense of purpose in any of the following verbs:
Be on the brink of+V-ing
Be on the verge of+V-ing
Be on the point of+V-ing
Be able+to+infinitive
Be about+to+infinitive
Be bound+to+infinitive
Be going+to+infinitive
Have+to+infinitive
Ought+to+infinitive.
By the way, what is the proper way to punctuate a question of this type where you want a colon and a question?
Be on the brink of+V-ing
Be on the verge of+V-ing
Be on the point of+V-ing
Be able+to+infinitive
Be about+to+infinitive
Be bound+to+infinitive
Be going+to+infinitive
Have+to+infinitive
Ought+to+infinitive.
By the way, what is the proper way to punctuate a question of this type where you want a colon and a question?
I don't know whether "purpose" is the word you want.
Taking your first three examples first, one could say The volcano is on the brink/verge/point of erupting - no sense of purpose, it's a natural event. Likewise for be about to and be going to.
I don't see a sense of purpose in be able to either; what does Doctors are able to cure many diseases with antibiotics have to do with purpose? Surely we're talking about possibility.
Finally, I don't see how the obligation expressed in have to and ought to are related to purpose except through context and not essential meaning.
Taking your first three examples first, one could say The volcano is on the brink/verge/point of erupting - no sense of purpose, it's a natural event. Likewise for be about to and be going to.
I don't see a sense of purpose in be able to either; what does Doctors are able to cure many diseases with antibiotics have to do with purpose? Surely we're talking about possibility.
Finally, I don't see how the obligation expressed in have to and ought to are related to purpose except through context and not essential meaning.
-
- Posts: 947
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
- Location: Spain
Andrew, you're getting a long way away from verb+verb where the options are normally presented as just a series of lists (the following verbs take to, these take -ing and these take both, now learn them!).
"of" is followed by -ing whether we like it or not. And I suspect that adjectives simply are followed by "to" (bound, happy, prepared, ready, sure, able, destined, certain, willing etc) . It may be that there is purpose in all these but the fact remains that there is no "Which way to go, down the route of to _____ or is it _____ing?"
Which is exactly what happens when students are faced with "yearn" or "strive" or "recollect" or "fancy" or " long" or "mean".
Why not put the question mark at the end of the list:
Be going+to+infinitive
Have+to+infinitive
Ought+to+infinitive?
"of" is followed by -ing whether we like it or not. And I suspect that adjectives simply are followed by "to" (bound, happy, prepared, ready, sure, able, destined, certain, willing etc) . It may be that there is purpose in all these but the fact remains that there is no "Which way to go, down the route of to _____ or is it _____ing?"
Which is exactly what happens when students are faced with "yearn" or "strive" or "recollect" or "fancy" or " long" or "mean".
Why not put the question mark at the end of the list:
Be going+to+infinitive
Have+to+infinitive
Ought+to+infinitive?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Lolwhites wrote:
I think that these verbs are equivelent in meaning to the modals and that they don't carry an idea of purpose, I just wanted someone else to confirm that. It seems that we can split the catenatives into two groups:
1) those that are equivelent to modals and
2) those that are not.
Those that are not equivelent to modals behave according to the ideas set out in:
http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Notes.html
Those that are equivelent to modals do not carry purpose.
Juan wrote:
"Can't be bothered" which can be followed by either form. Admitedly, it is preceeded by "can't" which always makes it more likely that a verb will be followed by V-ing. I think it may well be true when "can't" isn't there.
I would like to add a curious fact - it appears that if a verb ends in an adjective or past participle (it might be argued that all past participles are adjectives anyway) it can only be followed by to+infinitive. This suggests that trying the verb in the perfect tense may be a good method of differentiating. It is also why you can't have V-ing after the passive form of the verb.
When you have be+adj+prep it really does seem that it can only be followed by V-ing:
Be...
accustomed to,
adept at,
afraid of,
angry about,
ashamed about,
ashamed of,
assigned,
bad at,
beware of,
bored with,
capable of,
certain about,
certain of,
committed to,
concerned about,
concerned with,
content with,
critical of,
delighted about,
disappointed about,
discouraged from,
fascinated about,
enthusiastic about,
excelent at,
faced with
familiar with,
famous for,
fond of,
glad about,
good at,
happy about,
(or get) het up about,
inadept at,
incapable of,
intent on,
interested in,
known for,
nervous about,
obsessed about,
proud of,
resigned to,
sick of,
skilled at,
sorry for,
successful at,
terrible at,
tired of,
unaccustomed to,
unconcerned about,
unenthusiastic about,
unfamiliar with,
unhappy about,
up to,
upset about,
useful for,
wary of,
weary of,
worried about
That's what I wanted to hear.I don't know whether "purpose" is the word you want.
Taking your first three examples first, one could say The volcano is on the brink/verge/point of erupting - no sense of purpose, it's a natural event. Likewise for be about to and be going to.
I don't see a sense of purpose in be able to either; what does Doctors are able to cure many diseases with antibiotics have to do with purpose? Surely we're talking about possibility.
Finally, I don't see how the obligation expressed in have to and ought to are related to purpose except through context and not essential meaning.
I think that these verbs are equivelent in meaning to the modals and that they don't carry an idea of purpose, I just wanted someone else to confirm that. It seems that we can split the catenatives into two groups:
1) those that are equivelent to modals and
2) those that are not.
Those that are not equivelent to modals behave according to the ideas set out in:
http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Notes.html
Those that are equivelent to modals do not carry purpose.
Juan wrote:
I have shown that the fact of ending with a preposition does not mean a verb is automatically followed by V-ing, but there may be certain prepositions that it is true for, "of" may well be one of them.Andrew, you're getting a long way away from verb+verb where the options are normally presented as just a series of lists (the following verbs take to, these take -ing and these take both, now learn them!).
"of" is followed by -ing whether we like it or not.
I think that this is usually true, but there is at least one exception:And I suspect that adjectives simply are followed by "to" (bound, happy, prepared, ready, sure, able, destined, certain, willing etc) . It may be that there is purpose in all these but the fact remains that there is no "Which way to go, down the route of to _____ or is it _____ing?"
"Can't be bothered" which can be followed by either form. Admitedly, it is preceeded by "can't" which always makes it more likely that a verb will be followed by V-ing. I think it may well be true when "can't" isn't there.
I would like to add a curious fact - it appears that if a verb ends in an adjective or past participle (it might be argued that all past participles are adjectives anyway) it can only be followed by to+infinitive. This suggests that trying the verb in the perfect tense may be a good method of differentiating. It is also why you can't have V-ing after the passive form of the verb.
When you have be+adj+prep it really does seem that it can only be followed by V-ing:
Be...
accustomed to,
adept at,
afraid of,
angry about,
ashamed about,
ashamed of,
assigned,
bad at,
beware of,
bored with,
capable of,
certain about,
certain of,
committed to,
concerned about,
concerned with,
content with,
critical of,
delighted about,
disappointed about,
discouraged from,
fascinated about,
enthusiastic about,
excelent at,
faced with
familiar with,
famous for,
fond of,
glad about,
good at,
happy about,
(or get) het up about,
inadept at,
incapable of,
intent on,
interested in,
known for,
nervous about,
obsessed about,
proud of,
resigned to,
sick of,
skilled at,
sorry for,
successful at,
terrible at,
tired of,
unaccustomed to,
unconcerned about,
unenthusiastic about,
unfamiliar with,
unhappy about,
up to,
upset about,
useful for,
wary of,
weary of,
worried about
Or divide into the two sections I suggested above.Which is exactly what happens when students are faced with "yearn" or "strive" or "recollect" or "fancy" or " long" or "mean".
Why not put the question mark at the end of the list:
Be going+to+infinitive
Have+to+infinitive
Ought+to+infinitive?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
This paper by Patrick Duffley is available free on-line, and has some good stuff about changing use.
http://www.usc.es/ia303/TeresaFanego/Abstract%20CG.pdf
Also I'd like to change what I said about verbs ending in adjectives and past participles.
They are always followed by to+infinitive when un-negated except "let", "Let" is often replaced by "be allowed to" in the passive.
When "let" is followed by the bare infinitive without an object in the active eg "let go" then the past passive is "was let go". I guess this is because the word "let" implies purposeless inaction.
http://www.usc.es/ia303/TeresaFanego/Abstract%20CG.pdf
Also I'd like to change what I said about verbs ending in adjectives and past participles.
They are always followed by to+infinitive when un-negated except "let", "Let" is often replaced by "be allowed to" in the passive.
When "let" is followed by the bare infinitive without an object in the active eg "let go" then the past passive is "was let go". I guess this is because the word "let" implies purposeless inaction.
despite
Hey all....
Despite the interest any of us might have for the thousands of reasons why or why not we use the infinitive or the gerund, the original question, which was an easier way to teach them, might have the following answer:
Make lists of those verbs in contextual sentences and drill them into your students almost until their lips bleed.
If you want to teach all those subtle differences that are all open to debate, then go ahead. If you want to teach your students to use these verbs more or less in the same patterns that natives like you use these verbs, then the explanations are extra and the practice until the habits are attained is formost.
peace,
revel.
Despite the interest any of us might have for the thousands of reasons why or why not we use the infinitive or the gerund, the original question, which was an easier way to teach them, might have the following answer:
Make lists of those verbs in contextual sentences and drill them into your students almost until their lips bleed.
If you want to teach all those subtle differences that are all open to debate, then go ahead. If you want to teach your students to use these verbs more or less in the same patterns that natives like you use these verbs, then the explanations are extra and the practice until the habits are attained is formost.
peace,
revel.
-
- Posts: 947
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
- Location: Spain
Nevertheless, having decided to withhold all this subtlety from my students, I still present the contexts in sense groups: backward looking -ings, forward looking infinitives of purpose, forward looking verbs that nevertheless take -ing because they lack said purpose etc
Sorting out in my mind beforehand the whys of all this helps me to present the "censored" version in a way that is pleasing to me and helpful to them: not just a ragbag or alphabetical list of "verbs that take "to" and "verbs that take -ing" and "verbs that take both".
Thus hinting at but not necessarily going into details has its purpose.
Sorting out in my mind beforehand the whys of all this helps me to present the "censored" version in a way that is pleasing to me and helpful to them: not just a ragbag or alphabetical list of "verbs that take "to" and "verbs that take -ing" and "verbs that take both".
Thus hinting at but not necessarily going into details has its purpose.