Английского

§ 7. Within the gerund-participle correlation, the central point of 
our analysis will be the very lexico-grammatical identification of 
the two verbid forms in -ing in their reference to each other. Do 
they constitute two different verbids, or do they present one and the 
same form with a somewhat broader range of functions than either 
of the two taken separately? 
The ground for raising this problem is quite substantial, since the 
outer structure of the two elements of the verbal system is abso-
lutely identical: they are outwardly the same when viewed in isola-
tion. It is not by chance that in the American linguistic tradition 
which can be traced back to the school of Descriptive Linguistics 
the two forms are recognised as one integral V-ing. 
In treating the ing-forms as constituting one integral verbid entity, 
opposed, on the one hand, to the infinitive (V-to), on the other 
hand, to the past participle (V-en), appeal is naturally made to the 
alternating use of the possessive and the common-objective nounal 
element in the role of the subject of the ing-form (mostly observed 
in various object positions of the sentence). Cf.: 
I felt annoyed at his failing to see my point at once. «→ I felt an-
noyed at him failing to see my point at once. He was not, however, 
averse to Elaine Fortescue's entertaining the hypothesis.<→He 
was not, however, averse to Elaine Fortescue entertaining the hy-
pothesis. 
This use presents a case known in linguistics as "half-gerund". So, 
in terms of the general ing-form problem, we have to choose be-
tween the two possible interpretations of the half-gerund: either as 
an actually intermediary form with double features, whose linguis-
tic semi-status is truly reflected in its conventional name, or as an 
element of a non-existent categorial specification, i.e. just another 
variant of the same indiscriminate V-ing. 

---

119
In this connection, the reasoning of those who support the idea of 
the integral V-ing form can roughly be presented thus: if the two 
uses of V-ing are functionally identical, and if the "half-gerund" V-
ing occurs with approximately the same frequency as the "full-
gerund" V-ing, both forms presenting an ordinary feature of an or-
dinary English text, then there is no point in discriminating the 
"participle" V-ing and the "gerund" V-ing. 
In compliance with the general principle of approach to any set of 
elements forming a categorial or functional continuum, let us first 
consider the correlation between the polar elements of the contin-
uum, i.e. the correlation between the pure present participle and the 
pure gerund, setting aside the half-gerund for a further discussion. 
The comparative evaluations of the actually different uses of the 
ing-forms can't fail to show their distinct categorial differentiation: 
one range of uses is definitely noun-related, definitely of process-
substance signification; the other range of uses is definitely adjec-
tive-adverb related, definitely of process-quality signification. This 
differentiation can easily be illustrated by specialised gerund-
testing and participle-testing, as well as by careful textual observa-
tions of the forms. 
The gerund-testing, partly employed while giving a general outline 
of the gerund, includes the noun-substitution procedure backed by 
the question-procedure. Cf.: 
My chance of getting, or achieving, anything that I long for will 
always be gravely reduced by the interminable existence of that 
block. → My chance of what? → My chance of success. 
He insisted on giving us some coconuts. → What did he insist on?