 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
55
adjectival relation. Cf:.
... > The convention, which was called up by the conservative minority, failed to pass a satisfactory
resolution. ... -» Though he was welcomed heartily by his host, Frederick felt at once that something was wrong.
Cf. a more radical diagnostic transformational change of the latter construction:
... > Frederick, who was welcomed heartily by his host, nevertheless felt at once that something was wrong.
As is seen from the analysis, the adjectival relation of the past participle in the quoted examples is proved by
the near-predicative function of the participle in the derived transforms, be it even within the composition of the
finite passive verb form. The adverbial uses of the present participle react to similar tests in a different way. Cf.:
Passing on to the library, he found Mabel entertaining her guests. >
As he passed on to the library, he
found Mabel entertaining her guests.
The adverbial force of the present participle in constructions like that is shown simply, as resulting from the
absence of obligatory mediation of be between the participle and its subject (in the deriva-tionally underlying
units).
As an additional proof of our point, we may take an adjectival construction for a similar diagnostic testing.
Cf:.
Though red in the face, the boy kept denying his guilt. > Though he was red in the face, the boy kept
denying his guilt.
As we see, the word red, being used in the diagnostic concessive clause of complete composition, does not
change its adjectival quality for an adverbial quality. Being red in the face would again present another
categorial case. Being, as a present participial form, is in the observed syntactic conditions neither solely
adjectival-related, nor solely adverbial-related; it is by nature adjectival-adverbial, the whole composite unity in
question automatically belonging to the same categorial class, i.e. the class of present participial constructions
of different subtypes.
§ 6. The consideration of the English verbids in their mutual comparison, supported and supplemented by
comparing them with their non-verbal counterparts, puts forward some points of structure and function worthy
of special notice.
In this connection, the infinitive-gerund correlation should first be brought under observation.
Both forms are substance-processual, and the natural question that one has to ask about them is, whether the
two do not repeat each other by their informative destination and employment. This question was partly
answered in the paragraph devoted to the general outline of the gerund. Observations of the actual uses of the
gerund and the infinitive in texts do show the clear-cut semantic difference between the forms, which consists
in the gerund being, on the one hand, of a more substantive nature than the infinitive, i.e. of a nature nearer to
the thingness-signification type; on the other hand, of a more abstract nature in the logical sense proper. Hence,
the forms do not repeat, but complement each other, being both of them inalienable components of the English
verbal system.
The difference between the forms in question may be demonstrated by the following examples:
Seeing and talking to people made him tired. (As characteristic of a period of his life; as a general feature of
his disposition) -
-It made him tired to see and talk to so many people. (All at a time, on that particular
occasion); Spending an afternoon in the company of that gentle soul was always a wonderful pleasure.
(Repeated action, general characteristic) - - To spend an afternoon on the grass - lovely! (A response utterance
of enthusiastic agreement); Who doesn't like
singing? (In a general reference) - Who doesn't like to sing? (In
reference to the subject).
Comparing examples like these, we easily notice the more dynamic, more actional character of the infinitive
as well as of the whole collocations built up around it, and the less dynamic character of the corresponding
gerundial collocations. Furthermore, beyond the boundaries of the verb, but within the boundaries of the same
inter-class paradigmatic derivation (see above, Ch. IV, §8), we find the cognate verbal noun which is devoid of
processual dynamics altogether, though it denotes, from a different angle, the same referential process,
situation, event. Cf:.
For them to
have arrived so early! Such a surprise! - Their having arrived so early was indeed a great
surprise.- - Their early arrival was a great surprise, really.
The triple correlation, being of an indisputably systemic nature and covering a vast proportion of the
lexicon, enables us to interpret it in terms of a special lexico-grammatical category of processual representation.
The ti stages of this category represent the referential processual entity of the lexemic series, respectively, as
dynamic (the infinitive and its phrase), semi-dynamic (the gerund and its phrase), and static (the verbal noun