Search

Inspired by Gaeta's study of morphological distinctiveness as the basis for category formation, this article considers the possibility that by virtue of their invariable suffix - ings English pluralia tantum nominal gerunds (PTNGs) such as surroundings can be regarded as a subcategory of nominal gerunds. It is shown that the set of PTNGs is semantically very disparate with regard to the verb that underwent nominalization in the course of their formation. Differences are observed in a very large corpus with regard to the quantifiers and other items that co-occur with PTNGs, namely quantifiers regularly associated with plural count (e.g. many) or with mass nouns (e.g. much), but there is too much variability among PTNGs for the totality of them to be a candidate for category status. • English pluralia tantum nominal gerunds are analysed for the first time. • The gerunds in question have properties of mass nouns and of plural count nouns. • English pluralia tantum nominal gerunds are not a semantically unified class. • Different members of the set co-occur with different quantifiers and demonstratives. • Pluralia tantum nominal gerunds have too few shared morphosyntactic co-occurrence properties to be treated as a category. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies into the semantics of English gerunds have successfully uncovered meaning differences between nominal and verbal gerunds by adopting a referential perspective on their semantics. Referential research of gerundive nominalizations, however, still struggles with a number of issues, mainly centering around the position of verbal gerunds within the traditionally nominal domain of referentiality. This paper wishes to address these issues by establishing a multilayered model of referentiality which can be applied to both ordinary as well as less prototypical noun phrases. First of all, it disentangles the typically nominal feature of definiteness from the more flexible concept of specificity. Secondly, the model looks at the type of mental space in which the referent is accessed. Specific expressions are often associated with “actual” or realis spaces, whereas non-specific entities are typically linked to “virtual” or irrealis spaces. It is argued here, however, that deverbal nominalizations like gerunds realize specificity independently of the mental space the entity is located in. The multilayered model that is proposed is applied and integrated in a corpus-based analysis of Present-day English nominal and verbal gerunds. Mapping out the interactions between (in)definiteness, (non-)specificity and actuality/virtuality, it will be concluded, allows us to situate the various subtypes of nominal and verbal gerunds more accurately on the cline of functional nouniness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on nominal gerunds that combine verb-like semantics with the use of an indefinite article, as in Such reflection enables [a sharing of understandings]. The indefinite article in constructions like these is at first sight irreconcilable with the uncount status of the nominal gerund, and this gerund type has therefore tended to be either neglected or reduced to fully lexicalized (count) nouns. We argue that the use of the indefinite article is functionally motivated but cannot be captured in traditional referential categories, indefinite nominal gerunds being either specific, non-specific or generic and locating their referents in spatio-temporal, virtual or generic space. Instead, it is suggested, indefinite nominal gerunds impose a more schematic type of conceptualization on the event that is reified, that is they conceptualize it as a delineated event. The “particularized”, well-delineated event that indefinite nominal gerunds profile, it is shown, is either viewed directly, as a second-order entity, or the perspective that is taken is third-order, conceptualizing the event as an “idea”, “problem” or so forth. The delineation imposed by the indefinite article can be contextually supported by the syntactic function assumed by the indefinite nominal gerund, and/or through the use of lexical items. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Epos is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Epos is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Gerund, which are used frequently in Turkic languages along with verbal nouns and participial in infinite clauses express different relations to the content of a verb followed such as synchronous, preterit, posteriori, manner, binding, up temporality, goal etc. We study in these article gerunds in Kirgiz, which is a member of the Kipchak Turkic, using materials taken from newspapers and literary works published in Kirgizia. We classify gerund in Kirgiz as simple gerund (e.g. -A/-y, - (U)B etc.), derived gerund (e.g. -GAndA , -GançA etc.) and gerund which have the form of a postpositional phrase (e.g. -GandAn kiyin, -ArI menen etc.). We compare the gerund in Kirgiz with those of Turkish from the standpoint of their functions and syntax used in both Turkic languages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the development in the usage of the suffix -wise. The suffix can be formulated as in the manner of, with respect to, in regard to and concerning. The form has become productive again, as it originally was in Old English, but mainly in a different meaning. Also, the adverbs that result from -wise can have scope over phrases, as well as individual lexemes. The suffix -wise originated in Old English as an independent word meaning manner, fashion. Over time it came to be used as a derivative suffix, restricted primarily to adverbial expressions. In the earlier manner/dimension formations, -wise could be suffixed to both adjectival and nominal bases. However, newer manner/dimension formations have nominal bases only. They belong primarily to the lexical field of measure. In the 1992 Switchboard Corpus, nouns that serve as for -wise formations of either type are bare, as are those participial gerunds that occur. In different instances -wise occurs in initial position where it is used to contrast with another expressed or implied adverbial. With respect to increased freedom of occurrence, works on lexicalization has pointed to the general unindirectionality of lexicalization from complex phrases to single words, a process often called univerbation.

Discusses the rules on whether a word is a gerund or noun and participle or adjective. Information on the nounal function of a word ending in -ing; Use of words ending in -ing or -ed as adjectives; Background on the gerund-participle dichotomy.

Focuses on the rule and practice in the use of the case form of the noun or pronoun preceding the gerund. Possessive case rule used in nouns and pronouns; Comments on the construction that favors the possessive case for the substantive modifying a gerund; Details of several situations in which the choice of the objective or possessive case of the substantive is governed in part by custom and in part by the exigencies of the construction.

The article discusses the difference between Latin gerunds and gerundives. A gerund of a verbal noun with active signification and it is verbal because it denotes an action while gerundive is a verbal adjective with passive signification and it is also verbal because it denotes an action. In Latin gerund, the nominative is supplied by the infinitive and there is no occasion for the vocative.