Skip to main content

grammaticality - Do the -ing and to-infinitive "verbs" that follow catenative verbs always take the grammatical function of "noun"?


I'm wondering whether or not the verb form that follows a catenative verb has the grammatical function of a noun or of a verb, and whether or not it depends on the first catenative verb.


"I like to run" "I like running"


the -ing and the to infinitive can easily be switched in this sentence, and it seems to be implying "I like [the act of[running]]", so both the infinitive and the gerund are nouns.


"I like to run marathons"/"I like running marathons"


These seem like they might still be nouns but need "verb powers" to take the object, and then these sentences really turn into "I like [the act of [running marathons]]"/ "I like [to be in the state of [running marathons]]".


Is this true for both the -ing (and so it would be a gerund) and the to-infinitive? Are they, sort of, initially verbs so that they can take the object, and then the verb + object becomes a noun phrase?


If this is true, I'm also wondering if the same rules apply for a catenative verb such as "start".


"I started to run in the mornings" "I started running marathons in 2008"


"start" is a catenative verb that isn't a cognitive/emotion verb, and specifically suggests action. So what is the grammatical function of the to-infinitive and -ing verb forms? are they verbs? are they nouns? It just seems incorrect to say that their grammatical function is a noun, but everything I've seen on the internet is pretty vague. I've also seen that to-infinitives are never verbs, but only from one source and it just doesn't seem right to me.


So any ideas on the true grammatical function of the -ing and the to-infinitive after a catenative verb? And is it universal across catenative verbs, or does it depend on the verb category?




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more