And that had led to them talking about social media.

[shootingstar]

They'd ended up talking for a very long time about all sorts of things, which he seemed to sense she'd been in need of. He'd said something about not over-googling health symptoms. And that had led to them talking about social media - he belived that the more people were connected on social media, the lonelier society became.
(The Midnight Library by Matt Haig, episode Walking in Circles)

I'm getting confused about the phrasing "that had led to them talking about social media." I would prefer "that had led to their talking about social media." Are both phrasings correct? If so, do they differ in the meaning or do they have the same meaning? What do they mean? How do you call these structures, is there a set term of this structure? Thank you.

 

[jutfrank]

Are both phrasings correct?

Yes.

If so ... do they have the same meaning?

This is debatable but I'll say yes. There are, however, cases where each construction does have an easily distinguishable difference in meaning. For example, see if you can sense a semantic difference in the following pair:

I don't like him singing.
I don't like his singing.

How do you call these structures, is there a set term of this structure?

Among grammarians? Undoubtedly, yes. I'd guess there are different ways to describe this terminologically. The word 'them' is accusative and the word 'their' is possessive. The -ing part is best called by grammarians a 'gerund-participial', I think, or you can just call it an '-ing form' like I do.

To be honest, I'm surprised you've never noticed this before. The accusative structure version is incredibly common in casual spoken English. The possessive structure version is often much more formal and therefore characteristic of certain written registers. It can sometimes sound stiff or old-fashioned, especially when spoken. I'd say this is the main difference. In a novel such as this, and in this particular context, the accusative is highly fitting, though the possessive version wouldn't sound too jarringly out of style for this writer, in my opinion.

 

[emsr2d2]

How What do you call these structures? Is there a set term of for this structure?

See above. Remember - we don't say "How do you call [something]?" If you want to start with "How", say "How do you/we refer to [something]?

I echo jutfrank's statement that the possessive form can sound old-fashioned. My late grandfather, who was born in 1921, would have used "their". All later generations of our family would use "them".

 

[teechar]

Remember - we don't say "How do you call [something]?"

I agree that when asking about the appropriate term/phrase for something, that expression doesn't work. However, in other contexts, it can:

How do you call your dog back when she's run away 200 metres?
How do you call a class of rowdy students to attention?

 

[emsr2d2]

I agree that when asking about the appropriate term/phrase for something, that expression doesn't work. However, in other contexts, it can:

How do you call your dog back when she's run away 200 metres?
How do you call a class of rowdy students to attention?

Of course. I tried to make it clear that I was talking about the context in which the OP used it by making mine a standalone sentence that didn't have an ellipsis before the question mark.

 

[shootingstar]

@jutfrank: Thank you very much for your detailed reply

To be honest, I'm surprised you've never noticed this before.

I haven't seen this construction with the verb "lead" and the preposition "to" up to now. Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me.

 

[emsr2d2]

@jutfrank: Thank you very much for your detailed reply

I haven't seen this construction with the verb "lead" and the preposition "to" up to now. Especially The use of the preposition "to" has sounded sounds somewhat strange to me.

I suspect that now you've had it explained to you, you're going to see it everywhere. It's very, very common!

 

[5jj]

I'm getting confused about the phrasing "that had led to them talking about social media." I would prefer "that had led to their talking about social media." Are both phrasings correct?

WARNING: of (possible) interest only to grammar geeks.

According to Lyne (2006). the discussion about the 'correct' form goes as far back as the 18th century.

There was a famous argument in 1925-6 in the pages of SPE Tracts between the prescriptive Fowler and the more liberal Jespersen. Fowler believed the accusative form was 'indefensible', and Jespersen accused Fowler of being 'an instinctive grammatical moraliser'.

 

[shootingstar]

I suspect that now you've had it explained to you, you're going to see it everywhere. It's very, very common!

Thank you; yes, I've had it explained to me . . .

Especially The use of the preposition "to" has sounded sounds somewhat strange to me.

. . . but most recently it has sounded somewhat strange to me. Now it doesn't sound strange to me actually. I don't understand why I shouldn't use (or maybe 'must not use') the present perfect. And why not use "especially" there? I would like to know why you prefer the present simple there. Please help.

My grammar ( English Grammar Today, Cambridge) says:

Recent completed events . . .​

. . . and states in the very recent past (added by me)

We use the present perfect simple to talk about a finished event or state in the very recent past. We do not give a specific time. We often use words like just or recently for events taking place a very short time before now:

What’s this? What’s just happened?

The company employs around 400 staff and has recently opened an office in the UK.

Niki and John have just come back from a week in Spain.

Maybe I should have said The use of the preposition "to" has until recently sounded somewhat strange to me.

 

[Annabel Lee]

I haven't seen this construction with the verb "lead" and the preposition "to" up to now. Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me.

Interestingly, in some cases, the possessive is a grammatically impossible alternative in the construction. I'm not sure whether Fowler ever considered the fact that existential/expletive/dummy there can be used in it:

The new restrictions on water usage have led to there being fewer green lawns in the area.​

​

The possessive doesn't work after there: "have led to there's being fewer green lawns in the area; meanwhile, have led to their being fewer green lawns in the area would be as senselessly ungrammatical as Their are fewer green lawns in the area.

 

[shootingstar]

Not to kick it into the long gras, please answer my question of post #9, I'm anxious to know something new. Thank you.

 

[emsr2d2]

Very simply, I didn't know that you meant that it no longer sounded strange to you after a few of us told you that "lead to" is perfectly normal. However, your original "has sounded strange" was wrong too. You needed something like "Until this thread, "lead to" used to sound strange to me".

 

[shootingstar]

Very simply, I didn't know that you meant that it no longer sounded strange to you after a few of us told you that "lead to" is perfectly normal. However, your original "has sounded strange" was wrong too. You needed something like "Until this thread, "lead to" used to sound strange to me".

Sorry, but your reply baffles me. Does that mean my intended meaning (post #9). . .

. . . but most recently it has sounded somewhat strange to me. Now it doesn't sound strange to me actually.

. . . is covered by using the present perfect (see post #9)?


And what post do you refer my 'original "has sounded strange" ' to? If you refer to post #6, . . .

Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me.

. . . I would get baffled as well, because you could add "up to now" without any trouble there:

Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me up to now.

In my opinion, it isn't needed to add "up to now" in this context.

 

[emsr2d2]

Your original was the standalone sentence "Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me". Let's get rid of "especially" since it doesn't work at the start of a sentence and just deal with the rest.

The use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me.
Has it? When? 1993? In June? Last week? Ten seconds ago?

You said yourself that you could add "up to now" at the end. Yes, you could, and if that's what you meant, then you should. Even so, it would be much more natural to use other tenses/phrases.

Until I started this thread, "lead to" had sounded strange to me. However, now it doesn't.
"Lead to" used to sound strange to me. However, now it doesn't.
Until you made it clear that it was grammatically correct, "lead to" sounded strange to me. However, now it doesn't.

 

[Annabel Lee]

Especially the use of the preposition "to" has sounded somewhat strange to me.

And why not use "especially" there?

"Especially" is not standardly used right before the subject of the sentence (see here). "In particular" would be fine, though, or you could move "especially" so that it follows the subject phrase, where I would set it off with commas:

In particular, the use of the preposition "to" sounded somewhat strange to me.​

The use of the preposition "to," especially, sounded somewhat strange to me.​