# gerund/participle in English



## kirillp

Can you please dwell on the functional and grammatical differences between the gerund and the participle (especially the use with the nouns in the possessive case and possessive pronouns and different meanings in such examples as swimming boy - swimming pool, walking man - walking stick, etc.)?
And please tell the source of the information whether it’s a grammar textbook or some article.


----------



## berndf

A present participle is a a verbal adjective that marks the attributed noun or the predicated subject as being the agent of the action the verb expresses. A gerund is an abstract verbal noun that describes the action as such:
_A swimming boy ~ a boy who is swimming _(adjective; participle)
_A swimming pool ~ a pool for swimming _(noun; gerund)
_A walking man ~ a man who is walking_ (adjective; participle)
_A walking stick ~ a stick for walking_ (noun; gerund)


----------



## Awwal12

berndf said:


> A gerund is an abstract verbal noun that describes the action as such


A gerund isn't just "a noun", since it normally also incorporates certain syntactic properties of a verb. English gerunds, for instance, can take direct objects and attach adverbs (while, obviously, *improvement him or *improvement drastically are ungrammatical).


----------



## berndf

Awwal12 said:


> since it normally also incorporates certain syntactic properties of a verb.


In which case the entire phrase acts as a single noun equivalent (a _noun phrase_). I was answering the question about the functional aspects.


----------



## kirillp

berndf said:


> A present participle is a a verbal adjective that marks the attributed noun or the predicated subject as being the agent of the action the verb expresses. A gerund is an abstract verbal noun that describes the action as such:
> _A swimming boy ~ a boy who is swimming _(adjective; participle)
> _A swimming pool ~ a pool for swimming _(noun; gerund)
> _A walking man ~ a man who is walking_ (adjective; participle)
> _A walking stick ~ a stick for walking_ (noun; gerund)





Awwal12 said:


> A gerund isn't just "a noun", since it normally also incorporates certain syntactic properties of a verb. English gerunds, for instance, can take direct objects and attach adverbs (while, obviously, *improvement him or *improvement drastically are ungrammatical).


Ok, thanks a lot. By the way, have you heard anything about the 'fused participle' in the sentences like "He hid the jewels without anyone knowing that he stole them"? Or is it the gerund and one can change _anyone knowing_ into _anyone's knowing_?


----------



## berndf

Yes, there are cases where both interpretation are possible. E.g.:
_He saw a man running around the corner._
could be analysed with one or two noun phrases after the verb:

_He saw (a man running around the corner)._
_He saw (a man) (running around the corner)._
In 1. _running_ is a participle and in 2. it is a gerund.

Another example is the nature of the -ing form in the modern progressive form:
_He is walking_.
Here _walking_ looks prima facie like a predictive adjective and, hence, like a participle. But in all likelihood, the form developed out of a form employing a gerund:
_He is on walking > he is awalking > he is walking._

As we are in the history of language forum here: The original participle suffix -_end_ merged with the verbal noun suffix -_ing_ in Southern England in the 13th century. It is an ongoing debate if these semantic ambiguities were caused by the phonetic merger or the phonetic merger by the semantic ambiguities.


----------



## kirillp

berndf said:


> Yes, there are cases where both interpretation are possible. E.g.:
> _He saw a man running around the corner._
> could be analysed with one or two noun phrases after the verb:
> 
> _He saw (a man running around the corner)._
> _He saw (a man) (running around the corner)._
> In 1. _running_ is a participle and in 2. it is a gerund.
> 
> Another example is the nature of the -ing form in the modern progressive form:
> _He is walking_.
> Here _walking_ looks prima facie like a predictive adjective and, hence, like a participle. But in all likelihood, the form developed out of a form employing a gerund:
> _He is on walking > he is awalking > he is walking._
> 
> As we are in the history of language forum here: The original participle suffix -_end_ merged with the verbal noun suffix -_ing_ in Southern England in the 13th century. It is an ongoing debate if these semantic ambiguities were caused by the phonetic merger or the phonetic merger by the semantic ambiguities.



That's interesting. Are there any textbooks/articles/online sources you could recommend to find more examples and information about this topic and the whole gerund/participle thing in general?


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> Yes, there are cases where both interpretation are possible. E.g.:
> _He saw a man running around the corner._
> could be analysed with *one or two noun phrases* after the verb:
> 
> _He saw (a man running around the corner)._
> _He saw (a man) (running around the corner)._
> In 1. _running_ is a participle and in 2. it is a gerund.


But since they are noun phrases, isn't "running" in both 1. & 2. a gerund?


----------



## berndf

Perseas said:


> But since they are noun phrases, isn't "running" in both 1. & 2. a gerund?


In 1. _a man running around the corner _is a single noun phrase, where _man_ is the head noun and the participle phrase _running around the corner_ is an attribute, i.e. an adjective equivalent.


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> In 1. _a man running around the corner _is a single noun phrase, where _man_ is the head noun and the participle phrase _running around the corner_ is an attribute, i.e. an adjective equivalent.


ΟΚ, thank you.
About 2.: I guess the meaning is "He (who was running) saw a man". Isn't "running" also here an attribute to "He" and therefore an adjective equivalent?


----------



## berndf

Perseas said:


> ΟΚ, thank you.
> About 2.: I guess the meaning is "He (who was running) saw a man". Isn't "running" also here an attribute to "He" and therefore an adjective equivalent?


It is an ACI-type construction with a gerund instead of an infinitive, as usual in English.


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> It is an ACI-type construction with a gerund instead of an infinitive, as usual in English.


Thank you, berndf. So I was wrong in my assumption


Perseas said:


> I guess the meaning is "He (who was running) saw a man".


----------



## berndf

This interpretation 2. is a rough equivalent of German
_Er sah einen Mann um die Ecke rennen.
_
In early Middle English the gerund took the place of the infinitive as a verbal noun and this sentence can be analysed as if it contained an infinitive (_he saw a man run around the corner_).


----------



## Perseas

berndf said:


> This interpretation 2. is a rough equivalent of German
> _Er sah einen Mann um die Ecke rennen._


And this (1) is -I guess- a rough equivalent of German
_Er sah einen Mann um die Ecke rennenden_. 
Though I am not sure how idiomatic it is.


----------



## kirillp

berndf said:


> This interpretation 2. is a rough equivalent of German
> _Er sah einen Mann um die Ecke rennen.
> _
> In early Middle English the gerund took the place of the infinitive as a verbal noun and this sentence can be analysed as if it contained an infinitive (_he saw a man run around the corner_).



I’ve just got a little confused. So if we have a complex object, which is either _He  saw a man run_ (infinitive - single action) or _He saw a man running_ (participle - action in progress), then can we really use the gerund in this case and what meaning will it have? Is it like _He saw a man’s running_ (possessive case with gerund) meaning he saw the way the man was running?
Sorry for my stupidity.


----------



## elroy

1. He saw a man run.
2. He saw a man running.

Both are correct.  The difference is a nuance:

1. He saw a man perform the action of running.
2. He observed the event of a man running.


----------



## kirillp

elroy said:


> 1. He saw a man run.
> 2. He saw a man running.
> 
> Both are correct.  The difference is a nuance:
> 
> 1. He saw a man perform the action of running.
> 2. He observed the event of a man running.



I know, I was asking if the gerund is possible in this case or will it be considered a verbal noun and not a gerund?


----------



## elroy

I'm sorry, I don't understand your question.  Could you elaborate?


----------



## kirillp

elroy said:


> I'm sorry, I don't understand your question.  Could you elaborate?



I mean, can we say: _He saw a man’s running? _Will it be considered a complex object and what is the ing-form in this case: a gerund or a verbal noun?


----------



## elroy

I can’t think of a context in which that could work.


----------



## kirillp

elroy said:


> I can’t think of a context in which that could work.


Ok, thanks for the answer.


----------

