Английского

§ 3. The gerund is the non-finite form of the verb which, like the 
infinitive, combines the properties of the verb with those of the 
noun. Similar to the infinitive, the gerund serves as the verbal 
name of a process, but its substantive quality is more strongly pro-
nounced than that of the infinitive. Namely, as different from the 
infinitive, and similar to the noun, the gerund can be modified by a 
noun in the possessive case or its pronominal equivalents (express-
ing the subject of the verbal process), and it can be used with 
prepositions. 
Since the gerund, like the infinitive, is an abstract name of the 
process denoted by the verbal lexeme, a question might arise, why 
the infinitive, and not the gerund is taken as the head-form of the 
verbal lexeme as a whole, its accepted representative in the lexi-
con. 
As a matter of fact, the gerund cannot perform the function of the 
paradigmatic verbal head-form for a number of reasons. In the first 
place, it is more detached from the finite verb than the infinitive 
semantically, tending to be a far more substantival unit categori-
ally. Then, as different from the infinitive, it does not join in the 
conjugation of the finite verb. Unlike the infinitive, it is a suffixal 
form, which 

---

109
makes it less generalised than the infinitive in terms of the formal 
properties of the verbal lexeme (although it is more abstract in the 
purely semantic sense). Finally, it is less definite than the infinitive 
from the lexico-grammatical point of view, being subject to easy 
neutralisations in its opposition with the verbal noun in -ing, as 
well as with the present participle. Hence, the gerund is no rival of 
the infinitive in the paradigmatic head-form function. 
The general combinability of the gerund, like that of the infinitive, 
is dual, sharing some features with the verb, and some features 
with the noun. The verb-type combinability of the gerund is dis-
played in its combining, first, with nouns expressing the object of 
the action; second, with modifying adverbs; third, with certain 
semi-functional predicator verbs, but other than modal. Of the 
noun-type is the combinability of the gerund, first, with finite no-
tional verbs as the object of the action; second, with finite notional 
verbs as the prepositional adjunct of various functions; third, with 
finite notional verbs as the subject of the action; fourth, with nouns 
as the prepositional adjunct of various functions. 
The gerund, in the corresponding positional patterns, performs the 
functions of all the types of notional sentence-parts, i.e. the subject, 
the object, the predicative, the attribute, the adverbial modifier. Cf.: 
Repeating your accusations over and over again doesn't make them 
more convincing. (Gerund subject position) No wonder he delayed 
breaking the news to Uncle Jim. (Gerund direct object position) 
She could not give her mind to pressing wild flowers in Pauline's 
botany book. (Gerund addressee object position) Joe felt annoyed 
at being shied by his roommates. (Gerund prepositional object po-
sition) You know what luck is? Luck is believing you're lucky. 
(Gerund predicative position) Fancy the pleasant prospect of listen-
ing to all the gossip they've in store for you! (Gerund attributive 
position) He could not push against the furniture without bringing 
the whole lot down. (Gerund adverbial of manner position) 
One of the specific gerund patterns is its combination with the 
noun in the possessive case or its possessive pronominal equivalent 
expressing the subject of the action. This gerundial construction is 
used in cases when the subject of the gerundial process differs 
from the subject of the governing 

---

110
sentence-situation, i.e. when the gerundial sentence-part has its 
own, separate subject. E.g.: 
Powell's being rude like that was disgusting. How can she know 
about the Morions' being connected with this unaccountable affair? 
Will he ever excuse our having interfered? 
The possessive with the gerund displays one of the distinctive 
categorial properties of the gerund as such, establishing it in the 
English lexemic system as the form of the verb with nounal charac-
teristics. As a matter of fact, from the point of view of the inner 
semantic relations, this combination is of a verbal type, while from 
the point of view of the formal categorial features, this combina-
tion is of a nounal type. It can be clearly demonstrated by the ap-
propriate transformations, i.e. verb-related and noun-related re-
constructions. Cf.: I can't stand his criticising artistic works that are 
beyond his competence. (T-verbal →He is criticising artistic 
works. T-nounal→ His criticism of artistic works.) 
Besides combining with the possessive noun-subject, the verbal 
ing-form con also combine with the noun-subject in the common 
case or its objective pronominal equivalent. E.g.: I read in yester-
day's paper about the hostages having been released. 
This gerundial use as presenting very peculiar features of cate-
gorial mediality will be discussed after the treatment of the partici-
ple. 
The formal sign of the gerund is wholly homonymous with that of 
the present participle: it is the suffix -ing added to its grammati-
cally (categorially) leading element. 
Like the infinitive, the gerund is a categorially changeable (vari-
able, demutative) form; it distinguishes the two grammatical cate-
gories, sharing them with the finite verb and the present participle, 
namely, the aspective category of retrospective coordination (per-
fect in opposition), and the category of voice (passive in opposi-
tion). Consequently, the categorial paradigm of the gerund of the 
objective verb includes four forms: the simple active, the perfect 
active; the simple passive, the perfect passive. E.g.: taking — hav-
ing taken — being taken — having been taken. 
The gerundial paradigm of the non-objective verb, correspond-
ingly, includes two forms. E.g.: going — having gone. The perfect 
forms of the gerund are used, as a rule, only in semantically strong 
positions, laying special emphasis on the meaningful categorial 
content of the form. 

---

111