Gerund vs Infinitive

Status
Not open for further replies.

yun

Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
I have two questions about following two sentences

(A) The doorman held the door for her passing through.
(B) The doorman held the door for her to pass through.

Q1. If both sentences are grammatically correct?
Q2. If they are, what is the difference in the meaning?

Thank you.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
I have two questions about following two sentences

(A) The doorman held the door for her passing through.
(B) The doorman held the door for her to pass through.

Q1. If both sentences are grammatically correct?
Q2. If they are, what is the difference in the meaning?

Thank you.

(A) is incorrect.
 

engee30

Key Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
England
I have two questions about following two sentences

(A) The doorman held the door for her passing through. :cross:
(B) The doorman held the door for her to pass through. :tick:

Q1. If both sentences are grammatically correct?
Q2. If they are, what is the difference in the meaning?

Thank you.

:)
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
Are you a native speaker?
I am sorry but I need a serious answer with a grammatical explanation.

(A) The doorman held the door for her passing through.

What part of speech, in your opinion, is 'passing' in this sentence?
 
  • Like
Reactions: yun

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
I have two questions about following two sentences

(A) The doorman held the door for her passing through.
(B) The doorman held the door for her to pass through.

Thank you.
I don't like either of them. They both seem to indicate that the lady is going to pass through the door that the doorman is holding, rather than through the doorway. Is she in spirit?
The doorman held the door while she walked through.
I know this could also be read wrongly, but there's something about the original expression that invites the above interpretation.

Bhai, the 'passing' in 'passing through' is a gerund.
The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
I don't like either of them. They both seem to indicate that the lady is going to pass through the door that the doorman is holding, rather than through the doorway. Is she in spirit?
The doorman held the door while she walked through.
I know this could also be read wrongly, but there's something about the original expression that invites the above interpretation.

Bhai, the 'passing' in 'passing through' is a gerund.
The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.

Would you say: The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.
or:
The police cleared the road for the Queen's entourage to pass by.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Would you say: The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.
or:
The police cleared the road for the Queen's entourage to pass by.
I'd be more likely to say: The police cleared the road so the Queen could pass by. OR ... to let the Queen pass by.
But that's avoiding the question.
Are we talking about usage or grammatical correctness?
I have to agree with svartnik that it's grammatically correct.
I would never say the original sentence ... for her passing through, no matter how grammatical it was.

Here's another example with 'passing' as a gerund:
Doctor, I'm having trouble with my passing water.
Yes, 'I'm having trouble passing water' would be more common.
 

Pedroski

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Member Type
Other
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
China
Gerunds are a headache for anyone Yun. No one really knows where the English language is going with them, for all the confident talk. They can be nouns that take subjects and objects and assign case!!
There are two types: Nominal and verbal.
There are three verbal types: Accusative -ing, Possesive -ing, and PRO-ing.

If anyone tells you A) or B) is wrong, without an explanation, it is because they don't know and are guessing. A) is awkward, but not wrong.

Was it you who asked about 'I want the photos for sending to my sister'?
This is a quote from a paper by Robert Malouf, summarizing the properties of gerunds.
(13) a. A verbal gerund takes the same complements as the verb from
which it is derived.

b. Verbal gerunds are modifed by adverbs and not by adjectives.
c. The entire verbal gerund phrase has the external distribution of an
NP.

d. The subject of the gerund is optional and, if present, can be either
a genitive or an accusative NP.

The properties in (13) are shared by accusative subject (acc
-ing ), genitive subject (poss-ing ), and subjectless (pro
-ing ) verbal gerund phrases and are not shared by any other English constructions. The three types of verbal gerunds seem to be subtypes of a single common construction type, and any analysis of verbal gerunds ought to be able account for their similarities in a systematic way.

If you ever find a good explanation for the properties of gerunds, please let me know!
 
  • Like
Reactions: yun

yun

Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Bhai, the 'passing' in 'passing through' is a gerund.
The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.
Dear Raymott,

Basically, my question is whether gerund can be used or not in this syntax.
Someone explained to me that the doorman is holding the door for her not for the action of passing through, so it is incorrect.
How about your example?
The police cleared the road for the Queen's passing by.
Is this correct?
Then I don't think his explanation is appropriate.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
dear raymott,

basically, my question is whether gerund can be used or not in this syntax.
yes it can.

someone explained to me that the doorman is holding the door for her not for the action of passing through, so it is incorrect.
no, in your sentence, he's holding it for the action of her passing through.
he's holding it for her passing through, not (in grammar) for her.

how about your example?
The police cleared the road for the queen's passing by.
Is this correct?
would i have given it as an example if i thought it wasn't? ;-)
no one has yet said that it's wrong.

then i don't think his explanation is appropriate.
no do i, if you have represented it correctly.
grammatically, the police are not clearing the road for the queen, but for her passing by.
r.
 

yun

Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Dear Raymott,

How about this?

(A) I studied hard for (my) passing the exam.
(B) I studied hard to pass the exam.

(A) sounds awkward, doesn't it?
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Dear Raymott,

How about this?

(A) I studied hard for (my) passing the exam.
(B) I studied hard to pass the exam.

(A) sounds awkward, doesn't it?
It sounds abominable.

It appears though that svartnik would say anything that could be supported by a grammar book.
He must have some interesting conversations . :)
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
I was wrong to say that it is incorrect. As has been clearly pointed out by several members, it is grammatically correct. To me it looks and sounds wrong but I should have taken more time to reflect on it.
 

yun

Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
It sounds abominable.

Dear Raymott,

I am sorry to keep asking questions.
But, could you give an explanation why the first sentence is terrible?
What's wrong with the gerund in here?
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Dear Raymott,

I am sorry to keep asking questions.
But, could you give an explanation why the first sentence is terrible?
What's wrong with the gerund in here?
No, I don't think I can make it any clearer.
It sounds terrible because we don't say it that way.
Maybe someone else could expand even further, but I think the thread already tells the whole story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top