Lecture 9: The Gerund
ADVANCED SYNTAX
A PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURE

The English gerund is an intriguing structure which
causes a particular problem for X-bar theory


[His constantly complaining about the food] upset the
waiter
The problem is that:
from one perspective, the gerund looks like a clause
and contains the kind of verbal things that clauses
have
 from another perspective, the gerund looks like a DP
and contains the kind of nominal things that DPs have

A PROBLEMATIC STRUCTURE

But
 clauses
are headed by inflections and have VP
complements (headed by verbs) and
 DPs are headed by determiners and have NP
complements (headed by nouns)

So: is the gerund an IP or a DP?
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

The main thematic word in the gerund has an
‘-ing’ form:
 [his
washing the car every day] was predictable
 [their finding the treasure] was unexpected

The fact that the –ing form is a verbal form
supports the idea that the gerund is a clause:
 Clauses
contain VPs
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

The –ing word can take a ‘bare’ DP
complement
 John’s

hunting [DP tigers] was frowned upon
Only verbs and prepositions can do this
 eat [DP
an apple]
 on [DP the table]
 * observation [DP the results]
 * fond [DP chocolate]
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

Nouns and adjectives must have an inserted of
with their nominal complements
 Observation
of [the results]
 Fond of [chocolate]

This suggests that the –ing word is a verb and
hence that the gerund construction is a clause
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

Gerunds are modified by adverbs
 His

quickly adding the numbers
Adverbs modify verbs, not nouns
 to
quickly run
 * a quickly runner

This supports analysing the –ing word as a verb
and hence gerund constructions as clauses
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

The gerund construction can contain auxiliary
verbs:
His having left
 His being killed
 His having been killed


DPs never contain auxiliaries
a walk
 * a is walking
 * a have walked


This suggests that gerund constructions are
clauses rather than DPs
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS

However, gerund constructions cannot contain
inflections
*
his maying leave
 * his toing have left

This might be taken to indicate that –ing is an
inflection
 It

is in complementary distribution with inflections
Hence the gerund construction is an IP
CLAUSAL ASPECTS OF GERUNDS
DP ASPECTS OF THE GERUND
But ...
 The subject of the gerund is a possessor


Only DPs have possessors
 His
dog
 * his was thinking
 * his may leave

With non-pronoun possessors, the possession is
marked by ‘’s’
 John’s

having gone
This element is a determiner, which heads a DP
DP ASPECTS OF THE GERUND

The distribution of a gerund is not like an IP
 There
IPs
are some positions which DPs can go, but not
DP ASPECTS OF THE GERUND

Complement of a preposition



Subject of a clause with inversion



will [this problem] stop him
* will [that this is a problem] stop him
Cleft position



he thought about [the problem]
* he though about [that this was a problem]
It was [this problem] that I considered
* it was [that this is a problem] that I considered
Topic position


[this problem], we don’t need to consider
* [that this is a problem], we don’t need to consider
DP ASPECTS OF THE GERUND

The gerund can go in all these positions
I
worry about [his being dishonest]
 Does [his being dishonest] bother you
 It is [his being dishonest] that hurts
 [his being dishonest], I detest

This argues that the gerund is a DP, not an IP
DP ASPECTS OF THE GERUND
THE PROBLEM

But, this analysis contradicts all the evidence
that the ‘-ing’ word is a verb
 It
can take a DP complement
 It is modified by adverbs
 It can be accompanied by auxiliaries

So the analysis seems to be:
THE PROBLEM
THE PROBLEM

This cannot be right because determiners
cannot take VP complements
*
the [read the book]
 * a [have left]
 * every [have been leaving]

So we are left without a consistent analysis of
the gerund construction
ANOTHER GERUND

There is another kind of gerund which has
different properties to the one we have been
looking at:
 his

signing of the contract
These do not have to have possessors
 The

signing of the contract
In this case, they can appear with other
determiners
A
building of a bridge
ANOTHER GERUND

In this gerund, the –ing word behaves like a
noun
 It
cannot take a bare DP complement
*
 It
the signing the contract
is modified by an adjective
 His
 It
reluctant (*reluctantly) signing of the contract
cannot take auxiliary verbs
*
the having signed of the contract
 * the being signed
ANOTHER GERUND

This gerund, like the other, distributes like a DP
 We
were arguing about [John’s taking of photos]
 Will [his taking of photos] disturb you
 It is [the taking of photos] which is banned
 The taking of photos, I can’t agree with

All in all, this looks to be a simple DP
ANOTHER GERUND
A COMPARISON

The poss-ing gerund











* a drinking the wine
Distributes like DP
The drinking of the wine
Other determiners are
possible


* his eager drinking the wine
* his eagerly drinking of the
wine
* his having drunk of the wine
Subject is optional


John’s eager drinking of the
wine
X-ing = noun

* the drinking the wine
Only possessive determiner
possible
The –ing of gerund

* his eagerly drinking of the
wine
* his eager drinking the wine
His having drunk the wine
Subject is obligatory


John’s eagerly drinking the
wine
X-ing = verb


This drinking of the wine
Distributes like DP
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

There is a standard distinction made between
derivational morphology and inflectional
morphology
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

Derivational morphology
 Forms
new words from others
 Govern
 government
 Black  blacken
 Run  runner
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

Derivational morphology
 The
derived words have different properties to the
one they are derived from

Govern
Verb
 A political process


Government
Noun
 The body that
carries out the
political process

A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

Inflectional Morphology
 Forms
 live,
a new version of the same word
lived, living
 The
derived words differ only from the original in
terms of what the inflection adds

Live
Verb
 Process of being
alive
 Present tense


Lived
Verb
 Process of being
alive
 Past tense

A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

This distinction has been captured under the
assumptions that
 Derivational
morphology takes place in the lexicon
(before syntax)
 Inflectional morphology takes place in the syntax
(by head movement)
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

This is supported by the observations that:
 Derivational
morphology is (usually) irregular
 government;
 Which
denial; retraction; walk
morpheme is used depends on the lexical
item it is attached to
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

Inflectional morphology is (usually) regular
 governs;
denies; retracts; walks
 The
morphemes are lexically given and put together by a
syntactic process
 There may be post-syntactic phonological processes to
account for irregular inflections

 But
make+ed = made; put+ed = put
typically there IS a regular form (unlike with
derivation)
A SHORT DIVERSION: MORPHOLOGY

Derivational Morphology is (typically) nonproductive:
 Blacken,
widen, thicken, shorten
 * bluen, narrowen, thinnen, longen

Inflectional Morphology is (typically) very
productive
 Hates,
runs, hits, yawns, gives, arrives, says,
makes, knows, writes, becomes, lives, puts, pays,
takes, derives, evaporates, Xeroxes, congeals, ...
THE STATUS OF THE GERUND ‘-ING’

The gerund ‘-ing’:
 sometimes
changes verbs into nouns
 They
played football
 The playing of football

These suggest that it is a derivational
morpheme
THE STATUS OF THE GERUND ‘-ING’

But the gerund ‘-ing’:
 is
very regular
 is very productive

These suggest that it is an inflection
ANALYSIS
Let us suppose that –ing is an inflectional
morpheme
 Like Inflection, it takes VP and vP complements
 Unlike Inflection, it is not of the category I
 Its category is N
 So it projects an NP
 The only thing that it adds to the verb which
attaches to it, is its category

ANALYSIS – ING OF

We start with a
verb
ANALYSIS – ING OF
Which projects a
VP
 The VP can
contain a theme

ANALYSIS – ING OF
Here we add the
–ing
 Which projects
an NP
 There is nothing
to assign Case to
the theme

ANALYSIS – ING OF

But with nouns,
we can insert an
of
ANALYSIS – ING OF

The verb moves
to support the
bound
morpheme
ANALYSIS – ING OF
This NP is the
complement of a
determiner
 There doesn’t
have to be a
possessor

ANALYSIS – ING OF
But there can be
one
 If we have the
possessive
determiner
 There is no room
for an auxiliary

ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING

We start with
the verb
ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING

Which projects a
VP with its
theme
ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING
We complete
the VP with an
agentive verb
and agent
 The agentive
verb Case
marks the
theme
 So, no of
insertion is
needed

ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING

The verb
moves to
support the
abstract verb
ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING
At this point
we add the
–ing
 Which
projects an NP
 The agent
cannot get
Case

ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING

The verb
moves to
support the
bound
morpheme
ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING
The NP is the
complement
of a
determiner
 Which
projects a DP

ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING
The agent still
needs Case
 Only the
possessive
determiner can
assign Case
 So no other
determiner is
possible

ANALYSIS OF POSS-ING

The agent
moves to get
genitive Case
POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY

We start with
the verb
POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY
Which projects
a VP with a
theme
 And is
extended by an
agentive verb
with an agent
 The theme is
Case marked
by the abstract
verb

POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY

The verb
moves to
support the
abstract verb
POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY
We add a
‘little v’
expressing the
perfect
 The agent
cannot get
Case

POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY

The verb
moves to
support the
little v
POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY
We add –ing,
which projects
an NP
 The verb
cannot move
to support the
bound
morpheme

POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY
So an auxiliary
must be
inserted
 Because the
following
verbal
element is the
perfect, have
is inserted

POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY

Because the
agent still
needs Case,
only the
possessive
determiner
can be used
POSS-ING WITH AN AUXILIARY

The agent
moves to get
Case from the
possessor
FURTHER GERUNDS

There are two more gerunds which we are not going to
provide an analysis for, but mention them for the sake of
completeness

The Acc-ing gerund


The PRO-ing gerund




[him murdering the lecturer] was not nice
[PRO shooting students] is not allowed
These are like the poss-ing gerund in that the –ing
element is verbal
So –ing is added to the structure fairly high
They differ in terms of the subject

We will not attempt to analyse this difference
CONCLUSION

The different gerunds we have analysed differ only
in where the gerund morpheme enters into the
structure:


-ing of gerunds (the most nominal one)


The lower down in the structure, the less verbal the
construction is
have –ing taking the lexical VP as its complement
Poss-ing gerunds (more verbal)

have –ing taking the agentive VP or even the higher
aspectual vPs as its complement