Dick,
I certainly agree that idioms are perhaps better left whole,
rather than picking them apart, because of course then they lose their
meaning.
The "go camping" model is especially interesting, I
think, because it is confined to recreational activities: Not
only do we go camping, we also go fishing, hiking, swimming, boating.
Walking? Maybe. However, we don't go working or even
playing, nor do we go sleeping. Some folks do go drinking, I've
heard.
Those activities still seem to me like "where"
answers--in contrast to the linking "go"--with the
adjectival "bananas" and "crazy" and
"native."
Martha
Martha,
As
always, your postings are thoughtful, helpful, and
pellucid.
I do not
see "go camping/bowling/skiing" as parallel to "sit
reading/knitting/fidgeting." In the latter the verb and modifier are
independent of each other: she sat, and she read while doing so. With
"go camping" you can't say she went, and she camped while doing
so. "Go camping" is phrasal and idiomatic. It can only be
understood as a phrase.
To
illustrate the difference, one could read "She went walking" in
both ways: (1) she went for a walk (parallel to "go camping") and
(2) she went somewhere, and her means of transport was on foot
(parallel to "sit reading").
[GO +
Adjective] is frequently used to express a change of state or
activity. Sometimes "go" might be seen as a linking verb,
equivalent to "become": "go crazy/bald/deaf." But most
adjectives can't be used with "go": "become happy/sad/rich"
but not *"go happy/sad/rich." Others that can be used with "go"
can't be used with "become": "go native/AWOL/bananas" but
not *"become native/AWOL/bananas." When Clairol urges you to "go
blond," they aren't using "go" as a linking verb but as an
intransitive verb implying a volitional act.
Examples
with prepositional phrases: go off the deep end, go to pieces, go into
debt. All of the [GO + modifier] expressions that express a change of
state are idiomatic and phrasal in the sense that the meaning of
"go" cannot be understood independent of the modifier that follows
it.
Dick
Veit
________________________
Richard Veit
Department of English, UNCW
Wilmington, NC 28403-5947
910-962-3324
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martha Kolln
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 5:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Go camping
Michael,
As you see,
Ed and I agree on the function of "camping" as an
adverbial. I'd like to expand a bit on the issue of form and
function in relation to the verbals.
In
traditional grammar, as you know, "verbal" serves as an
umbrella term for infinitives, gerunds, and participles--generally
speaking, for verbs in their roles other than as the predicating, or
main, verb of a clause.
The term
"infinitive" is straightforward: It refers strictly to form,
to the base form of the verb, with or without "to." In
every verb except "be," the infinitive is identical to the
present tense: to eat, to sleep, to seem. The infinitive--the
base form--is the form of the verb used in commands (Eat your dinner;
Be nice to your sister; Have a good day). It's also used
adverbially (We took the week off to go camping); adjectivally
(Our decision to go camping turned out to be a disaster); and
nominally (We decided to go camping). In other
words, the term "infinitive" itself tells us nothing at all
about function. (And note that my description of the
infinitive--including, as it does, commands--goes beyond the
traditional definition of "verbal." I could also have
mentioned the infinitive as a form used in the main verb string, when
it follows a modal: "You should be nice to your
sister.")
The term
"gerund," on the other hand, includes both form and
function; it refers to the -ing or -en forms of the verb
when it is used nominally--that is, when it fills the function of a
noun. (Camping is fun; We enjoy camping.) In
other words, to call a verb a gerund automatically brands it as a
nominal.
The term
"participle" is a fuzzy one, not at all clear-cut like
"gerund." "Participle" has two meanings:
It traditionally refers not only to the -ing and -en forms themselves,
known as the present participle and past participle--in other words, a
designation of form--but also to those forms when they are used
adjectivally (The sleeping baby looks peaceful; The movie
directed by Clint Eastwood won the Oscar)--a designation of
function.
However,
despite that traditional limitation of function to adjectivals, there
are occasions when the -ing form modifies verbs, as in Michael's
example. So it makes sense to expand on the traditional
"participle as verbal" definition to include adverbials as
well as adjectivals. In "A Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language," Quirk et al. do precisely that when they
discuss (on p. 506) what they call "obligatory adjuncts" [in
other words, obligatory adverbials] with certain verbs (sit, stand,
come, go) such as "He stood waiting," She sat
reading," "She came running." In other
words, these are intransitive verbs that in certain contexts are
incomplete without adverbials.
I think it's
fair to conclude, then, that to limit the verbal/participle to
"modifier of nouns"--that is, to say that participles modify
only nouns and not verbs--is not accurate when it comes to certain
verbs, as described by Quirk et al.--and by
Michael.
In Ed's
explanation of "We go camping every summer," instead
of expanding the definition of "participle" to include
adverbials, he has expanded the definition of gerund. I
prefer to leave the definition of gerund as an -ing or -en verb that
fills a nominal function. (While it's true that nouns and noun
phrases can indeed modify verbs, they are not functioning nominally
when they do so; they are functioning
adverbially.)
(I should
mention also that in his KISS grammar Ed has come up with a solution
to that dual use of the term "participle": He calls
the adjectival use of -ing and -en verbs "gerundives."
)
In my
explanations of modern grammar, I try to use traditional terminology
that has wide acceptance whenever possible, but sometimes, as in the
case of "participle," that terminology may have to be
explained in new, more accurate ways; it may have to be redefined.
Another example, just to make the point clear, is the definition of
"pronoun": A pronoun generally substitutes for a
nominal (a complete noun phrase, even a verb phrase or clause)--not
just a noun, as the traditional definition tells
us.
My apologies
for going so far afield from camping.
Martha
Kolln
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/