are both the options correct

[Sunita Mehta]

The President intended giving/to give his men a pay rise.

[David L.]

The President intended giving his men a pay rise, but Congress vetoed the legislation (so they didn't get the pay rise).

The President intends to give his men a pay rise. (and his men are looking forward to spending it...when it comes through!)

[norwolf]

The President intended giving his men a pay rise, but Congress vetoed the legislation (so they didn't get the pay rise).

The President intends to give his men a pay rise. (and his men are looking forward to spending it...when it comes through!)

LONGMAN Dictionary of Contemporary English says:
1 to have something in your mind as a plan or purpose [↪ intention]
intend to do something
I intend to spend the night there.
intend somebody/something to do something
I didn't intend her to see the painting until it was finished.
I never intended things to turn out the way they did.
intend that
It is intended that these meetings will become a regular event.
intend doing something
We intend looking at the situation again.
I fully intend (=definitely intend) to return home next year.

Both are correct.
Not a teacher.

[Raymott]

The President intended giving/to give his men a pay rise.

They mean pretty much the same thing. I'm not sure why the above posts have changed tenses on you.

[NICO0208]

Not a teacher

Both sentences are correct

[Barb_D]

Maybe a US thing, but "intended giving" sounds very odd to my (American) ear. Only "intended to give" sounds right in that sentence.

[konungursvia]

I second what Barb says. Here, we definitely "intend to give," not intend giving. In double or chain verbs, only the first is conjugated, and the rest are all in the infinitive.

[ptetpe]

For your reference:

Where both constructions are admitted, there is usually felt to be a difference of aspect or mood which influences the choice. As a rule, the infinitive gives a sense of mere 'potentiality' for action, as in She hoped to learn French, while the participle gives a sense of the actual 'performance' of the action itself, as in She enjoyed learning French. In the case of try, the double meaning is particularly clear:

Shelia tried to bribe the jailor. (1)
Shelia tried bribing the jailor. (2)
[l] implies that Sheila attempted an act of bribery,but did not manage it;
[2] implies that she actually did bribe the jailor,but without (necessarily) achieving what she wanted. With other verbs, the difference is more subtle, and may be overruled or neutralized by the meaning of the verb of the main clause.

Source:Quirk et al. CGEL P.1191

[Raymott]

I agree with Barb that it must be an American thing.
Note the original post was in Nov 2008, so the OP no doubt also believes that "intended giving" is acceptable.

[Pedroski]

Shelia tried to bribe the jailor. (1)
Shelia tried bribing the jailor. (2)


'there is usually felt to be a difference of aspect or mood which influences the choice.' This is a passive construction, typical of Randolph Quirk, because he is not certain, nor has any proof of what he is saying. If he knew, he would say so in an active voice.


What has been said is not what is implied.
What the implication of the sentences is, is purely a matter of personal interpretation and will be different, depending upon whom you ask.

The President intended to give his men a pay rise.
The President intended giving his men a pay rise. Both are fine, clear, and correct. If the President was a s.o.b., and didn't cough up with the cash, has no effect on the correctness of the sentences.