 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
57
correlation between the pure present participle and the pure gerund, setting aside the half-gerund for a further
discussion.
The comparative evaluations of the actually different uses of the ing-forms cannot fail to show their distinct
categorial differentiation: one range of uses is definitely noun-related, definitely of process-substance
signification; the other range of uses is definitely adjective-adverb-related, definitely of process-quality
signification. This differentiation can easily be illustrated by specialized gerund-testing and participle-testing,
as well as by careful textual observations of the forms.
The gerund-testing, partly employed while giving a general outline of the gerund, includes the noun-
substitution procedure backed by the question-procedure. Cf:.
My chance of getting, or achieving, anything that I long for will always be gravely reduced by the
interminable existence of that block. > My chance of what? > My chance of success.
He insisted on giving us some coconuts. > What did he insist on? > He insisted on our acceptance of the
gift.
All his relatives somehow disapproved of his writing poetry. > What did all his relatives disapprove of >
His relatives disapproved of his poetical work.
The other no less convincing evidence of the nounal featuring of the form in question is its natural
occurrence in coordinative connections with the noun. Cf:.
I didn't stop to think of an answer; it came immediately off my tongue without any pause or planning. Your
husband isn't ill, no. What he does need is relaxation and simply cheering a bit, if you know what I mean. He
carried out rigorously all the precepts concerning food, bathing, meditation and so on of the orthodox Hindu.
The participle-testing, for its part, includes the adjective-adverb substitution procedure backed by the
corresponding question-procedure, as well as some other analogies. Cf.:
He was in a terrifying condition. > In what kind of condition was he? > He was in an awful condition.
(Adjective substitution procedure). Pursuing this course of free association, I suddenly remembered a dinner
date I once had with a distinguished colleague. > When did I suddenly remember a dinner date? > Then I sud-
denly remembered a dinner date. (Adverb-substitution procedure). She sits up gasping and staring wild-eyed
about her. > How does she sit up? > She sits up so. (Adverb-substitution procedure).
The participle also enters into easy coordinative and parallel associations with qualitative and stative
adjectives. Cf.:
That was a false, but convincing show of affection. The ears are large, protruding, with the heavy lobes of
the sensualist. On the great bed are two figures, a sleeping woman, and a young man awake.
Very important in this respect will be analogies between the present participle qualitative function and the
past participle qualitative function, since the separate categorial standing of the past participle remains
unchallenged. Cf..
an unmailed letter - a coming letter; the fallen monarchy - the falling monarchy; thinned hair - thinning hair.
Of especial significance for the differential verbid identification purposes are the two different types of
conversion the compared forms are subject to, namely, the nounal conversion of the gerund and,
correspondingly, the adjectival conversion of the participle.
Compare the gerund-noun convcrsional pairs:
your airing the room - - to take an airing before going to bed; his breeding his son to the profession -
- a
person of unimpeachable breeding; their calling him a liar - - the youth's choice of a calling in life.
Compare the participle-adjective conversional pairs:
animals living in the jungle - - living languages; a man never daring an open argument - - a daring inventor;
a car passing by - - a passing passion.
Having recourse to the evidence of the analogy type, as a counter-thesis against the attempted
demonstration, one might point out cases of categorial ambiguity, where the category of the qualifying element
remains open to either interpretation, such as the typing instructor, the boiling kettle, or the like. However,
cases like these present a trivial homonymy which, being resolved, can itself be taken as evidence in favour of,
not against, the two ing-forms differing from each other on the categorial lines. Cf.:
the typing instructor > the instructor of typing; the instructor who is typing; the boiling kettle > the kettle
for boiling; the kettle that is boiling
At this point, the analysis of the cases presenting the dear-cut gerund versus present participle difference can
be considered as fulfilled. The two ing-forms in question are shown as possessing categorially differential