ARGUMENT LINKING IN DERIVED NOMINALS 377(2) a. the destroying of the documents
b. the destruction of the documents.A major syntactic effect of this contrastive function is that only the argu
ment responsible for the action can occur as a prenominal possessor, even
where the vNP counterpart is not so restricted:
(3) a. North's destruction/destroying of the documents
b. the documents' destruction/*destroying by North.
While the restrictions identified here and in (la) exemplify only two of sev
eral characteristics distinguishing action nominals from derived nominals,
they are indicative of the fact that the principles which define syntactic rela
tions in the action nominal are not identical to those defining vNP syntax.
In short, the action nominal requires an analysis of its own. Consequently,
with one important exception, action nominals are excluded from the cur
rent study.
Only where action nominal -ing forms do not function contrastively are
they included. This occurs where there is no alternative vN to be con
trasted. For example, if a verb either has no derived-N counterpart (cf. 4a),
or has a nominalized form which is restricted to a nonaction reading (cf.
4b), an action nominal may be used to fill the gap:
(4) a. the trimming of the trees
b. the breaking of the string (cf. ?the breakage of the string)
Similarly, where a vN refers only to a semantically-restricted sense of the
verb, an action nominal may be used for those senses not encompassed by
the vN. Where gift, for example, heads a vNP denoting action, it can only
be used in contexts in which the recipient of the object being transferred
can be construed as a beneficiary.^4 Where the recipient cannot be so con
strued, the action nominal must be used.
(5) a. the gift of the books to the library
b. the giving/*gift of the speeding ticket to the young driver
the giving/*gift of the exams to the professor
Summarizing, then, the concern here is with nominals headed by ver
bally-derived nouns and noncontrastive -ing forms used to fill vN gaps.
Within these limits, three types of vNPs have been set aside for separate
investigation and are not included in the study: complex nominals of the
type analyzed by Levi (1978) (e.g. industrial water pollution, city trainees)
and nominals including either clausal complements (e.g. Joe's belief [that