Re: ``Ken and I being on the radio together''

On 2008-01-22, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

[Adam]
I think your argument is basically that because the alleged gerund and
the present participle of any verb have the same pronunciation and
spelling, they *are* the same thing (in ModE, that is) --- is that a
fair summary?
[PTD]
Certainly. A descriptive grammar does not consult the history of the
language. (In almost every case, that history is accessible only via
internal or comparative reconstruction anyway.)

I can't argue with that within the synchronic view (although I do
think the synchronic approach is not the only interesting or useful
one).

Would you go so far as to say that the infinitive and the present
tense forms (apart from the third-person singular) are the same thing
(except for _be_, of course)?


[AF]
But don't you think the distinction (which can be historically
justified) is useful for teaching English grammar?
[PTD]
Not my concern! If you come from a language that has two different
forms, such as Latin, it would be useful to teach you, via contrastive
analysis, that the two different forms are represented by the same
single form in English.

I had in mind not only EFL but also teaching English grammar (in a
moderately prescriptive sense) and writing skills to native speakers
in high school. It's useful to distinguish verbal nouns from verbal
adjectives functionally, even if they have the same surface form.

Of course, if one gets carried away, one might end up agreeing with
Fowler about "fused participles" (I have to admit he was stepping off
the dock there).


--
Is there any proof that English borrows words?? I mean, have we ever
given one back? Do we pay for a replacement if we break one? How does
this work? [Matthew L Martin]
.

Quantcast