ATEG Archives

December 2008

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 14 Dec 2008 09:38:40 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (77 lines)
Herb,
   Nice analysis. Not sure why I missed it, especially since John asked
for a functional analysis, and this is something very clearly presented
in Halliday.
   I like to use these kinds of pairings to show the distinction:
   "I saw his slow landing on the river."
   "I saw him landing/land slowly on the river."

   "I watched his painful demise from cancer."
   "I watched him dying/die painfully from cancer."

    If,in fact, these participle structures (or infinitive
structures)often bear subjects (as seems true in the second sentence
of each pair), that's another argument for calling them clauses. The
only thing missing is the finite.

   What we perceive is often a happening or process, so it makes sense
that we can construe it in that way.

   As you say, finding and discovering verbs work a little differently.

Craig>


 Why not a third analysis?  "being" as a participle, as in "I found him
> fishing in the White River."  ""See" allows all three constructions.
> "Find" does not.  Other perception verbs allow the participial
> construction as well:
>
> 	I felt the breeze blowing on my back.
> 	I smelled the paper burning.
> 	I heard the sirens blaring as the fire trucks went by.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of DD Farms
> Sent: 2008-12-13 01:31
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Clause or Phrase
>
> At 10:44 PM 12/12/2008, John Curran wrote:
>>The boy was very happy that his mother did not see him being such a pig.
> . . .
>
> DD: The analysis went off into what sort of clause followed,
> "that."  Arrgh. Shouldn't some attention have been placed on the use
> of "him" instead of "his?" If the emphasis is on whom the mother saw,
> then I will allow "him," but insist on a comma after. If the emphasis
> is on what the mother saw, I suggest it was the action following a
> possessive, "his."  It is awkward in the first case, as that comma
> might be interpreted to his mother's being the pig. Still, I think
> that if you allow less than high standard English to prevail, the
> possessive and the gerund connection is ignored.
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
>      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
>      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2