Basic English Grammar with Exercises

(ff) #1
Chapter 8 - The Syntax of Non-Finite Clauses

assign Case and hence there is no need to insert of. This can be clearly seen in the
different behaviours of verbs and their derived nominal counterparts:


(85) a observe the result – observe of the result
b observation of the result –
observation the result


As the ing element in (84b) has an of before its DP complement, we can assume that it
is a noun not a verb. Finally, these kind of ing elements are modified by adjectives
rather than adverbs again indicating their nominal status:


(86) a the enormous/enormously building
b the intricate/
intricately painting of the landscape


It is usually accepted that such elements are simply derived nominals turned from verb
to noun by a lexical process before being entered into a structure.
If we now refer back to (83), we note that some of these features are missing. For a
start, there is no preposition before the DP complement. This suggests that this ing
element is not a noun, but a verb. This is confirmed by the fact that this element is
modified by an adverb, not an adjective:


(87) the patient’s obstinately/*obstinate refusing the medicine


Verbs head VPs not NPs and so presumably the part of the structure headed by the ing
element is a VP. This is where the problems begin. Although a determiner is not
possible with these elements:


(88) *the refusing the medicine


As we see in (83) a possessor is allowed. Whatever the status of the possessive marker
‘’s’, possessors are elements which are confined to DP specifier position and hence the
whole construction would appear to be a DP. This is further confirmed by the
distribution facts concerning the construction. Note that the gerund in (83) serves as
the complement of a preposition. In general prepositions take DP complements and
they certainly do not take VP complements. Prepositions do not even easily take
clausal complements:


(89) *they were worried about [that the patient refused the medicine]


There are a few prepositions which appear to be able to take IP complements (e.g.
since, before, after, etc.), but then it might be that these are kinds of complementisers
rather than prepositions.
The distributional evidence therefore favours the analysis of the gerund as a DP.
Hence we have the following structure:

Free download pdf