Infinitive



{to Ø Inf.} {Ø Inf.}

These forms are the two variants of one and the same categorial form. The

difference between them depends entirely on the syntactical construction in which the

Infinitive occurs, there being a regular parallelism in their usage.

e.g. I saw him run. – He was seen to run.

or

I helped him do it. – I helped him to do it.

The -ing form is characterized by the morpheme {-ing}, which is represented

by the only allomorph – the suffix [i.]. Traditional grammar distinguishes between

two different sets of homonymous forms with the suffix {-ing} – Participle I

(Present Participle) and the Gerund. As there is no external difference between the

two sets the question may arise whether there is enough reason to say that there are

two sets of forms or there is only one set of forms (the -ing form) which in different

contexts acquire different shades of meaning and perform different syntactic

functions. This view was put forward by the Dutch scholar E. Kruisinga.

Using the terms Participle I and the Gerund one should bear in mind that they

are but 2 types of the syntactical functioning of one and the same form.

Note: Apart from the inflexional morpheme “-ing” there are 2 more

homonymous derivational (wordforming) morphemes – that of a noun and that of an

adjective:

57

the reading of the bill

the comings and goings in the house

an interesting man.

Participle II is characterized by the morpheme {-en} represented by a greater

number of allomorphs than the morphemes of the Infinitive and the -ing form. Most

productive are the three phonologically conditioned allomorphs /d/, /t/, /id/. Others

are – the suffix (-en), e.g. taken, fallen; simply [n], e.g. known; a zero morph, e.g. put,

set; etc.

As the Participle has only one form, it does not possess any of the grammatical

categories of the Infinitives and the –ing form. The grammatical meaning of the

Participle is closely connected with the lexical character of the verb. The participle is,

in the main, formed from transitive verbs and has passive meaning.

e.g. It was a question put down by one of the correspondents.

The number of participles formed from intransitive verbs is very limited. They

have active meaning and usually denote an action preceding that of the predicative

verb.

e.g. The house was made of unpainted plank, gone grey now.

3.6. Predicative complexes in modern english

The Outline of the problem discussed

1. Secondary predication, its constituent parts (nominal and verbal

components).

2. Predicative complexes with the Infinitive.

3. Predicative complexes with the Participle.

4. Gerundial complex, its formation and syntactic functions.

One of the most striking peculiarities of Modern English structure is the

existence of the so-called “complex parts” in the sentence. Complex parts of the

sentence are often expressed by specific syntactic structures which are traditionally

called “Predicative Complexes” in English Grammar. A predicative complex

comprises a nominal and a verbal components, which function as one syntactic

whole, as a complex part of the sentence. The relations between the nominal and the

verbal components in a predicative complex are similar to those between the subject

and the predicate in a sentence: the nominal component denotes the doer of the action

and the verbal component denotes the action itself. These relations are also known as

secondary predication. The difference between the subject and the predicate of the

sentence, on the one hand, and the nominal and the verbal components of the

predicative complex, on the other hand, lies in the form. In contrast to the

morphologically agreed subject and predicate, the nominal and the verbal

components of a complex do not agree in person and number. It should be also

stressed that the nominal element of the complex is always different from the subject

of the sentence. Each non-finite form of the verb can form a predicative complex,

thus, we distinguish Infinitive, Participial and Gerundial Complexes.

The Infinitive builds up the following complexes:

the Subjective-with-the Infinitive Construction

58

the Objective-with-the Infinitive Construction

the For-to-Infinitive Construction

The Subjective-with-the Infinitive Construction consists of a noun in the

common case or a personal pronoun in the nominative case and an infinitive. As is

shown by the name of this predicative construction, its parts are the subject of the

sentence and the Infinitive, which stand in predicate relation to each other. Such

sentences can be transformed into complex ones with the indefinite-personal subject

in the principal clause:

e.g. He is reported to have left ЃЁ They report (or somebody reports) that he

has left.

The car was heard to turn round the corner ЃЁ They heard (somebody

heard) that the car turned round the corner.

The peculiarity of this complex is that the subject of the sentence coincides

with the nominal component of the complex itself. It is mostly used after verbs in the

Passive form and after certain verbs (happen, chance, appear, turn out, prove, seem)

in the active form and performs the function of the Complex Subject

e.g. He is often seen to be walking in the garden.

The president is reported to have arrived in the USA.

I happened to have met him before.

It turned out to be true to fact.

Sentences with this construction are usually translated into Russian by means

of an impersonal principal clause and a subordinate one.

e.g. He is known to be a good teacher. ЃЁ Известно, что он хороший

преподаватель.

The Objective-with-the Infinitive Construction consists of a noun (or a nounpronoun)

in the common case or a personal pronoun in the objective case and an

infinitive. It functions as a Complex Object and is used after a wide range of verbs,

taking both a direct and an indirect non-recipient object.

e.g. I felt them approach me suddenly.

She made her friend answer this difficult question.

I know him to be a very good doctor.

Mother doesn’t let me come home late.

This construction is usually translated into Russian by means of a subordinate

clause:

She saw him enter the room. ЃЁ Она увидела, как он вошел в комнату.

The For-to-Infinitive Construction is expressed by a noun in the common case

or a personal pronoun in the objective case and an infinitive with the particle to. It is

introduced by the preposition for. The construction may function as different parts of

the sentence:

subject

e.g. For you to go there just now is very dangerous.

It was practically impossible for them to meet anybody.

predicative

e.g. That is not for me to decide.

object

59

e.g. I watched for him to appear through the bushes.

attribute

e.g. There was nothing for him to say.

adverbial modifier of purpose.

e.g. She stepped aside for me to pass.

adverbial modifier of consequence.

e.g. The chance was too good for Jack to miss it.

The Participle builds up the following complexes:

the Subjective Participial Construction

the Objective Participial Construction

the Absolute Nominative Construction

The Subjective Participial Construction consists of a noun in the common case

or a personal pronoun in the nominative case serving as the subject of the sentence

and a participle. The subject of the sentence and the Participle stand in predicate

relation to each other.

e.g. The children were left playing on the floor.

The car was last seen parked at the hotel.

He was heard singing aloud.

This construction is parallel to the Subjective Infinitive Construction.

The Objective Participial Construction consists of a noun in the common case

or a pronoun in the objective case and participle, forming a syntactical complex, the

two main components of which are in predicative relationship. In comparison with

the Infinitive in this function Participle I shows more clearly the durative character of

the action. The construction functions as a complex object.

e.g. I saw my friend crossing the street.

We heard them quarreling.

Nobody wanted him going there alone.

We heard the door shut.

At first she thought Johnny killed.

Nobody wanted it done in such a way.

The Absolute Nominative Construction consists of a noun in the common case

or a pronoun in the nominative case and Participle I or Participle II. The nominal and

the verbal components make a syntactical complex functioning as a detached

adverbial modifier. The position of the construction varies: it can either open the

sentence or close it. The Absolute Nominative Participial Construction is generally

used as an adverbial modifier of reason or attendant circumstances, although

sometimes it is an adverbial of time. Occasionally, especially with the verbs to permit

and to fail, it is an adverbial of condition.

e.g. Her friend smiling, she felt much better.

She ran up the stairs, her heart thumping painfully.

“Bye,” he said, and walked away, his farewell unanswered.

The car having stopped, the boys jumped out onto the grass.

Dinner served, Mrs. Marlow rang the bell.

Weather permitting, we shall get out of town on Sunday.

60

This construction is often used with the preposition “with”:

e.g. I can’t write with you standing there.

He went into the house, with a curious sadness pressing upon him.

She stood with her arms folded, staring thoughtfully.

The Gerund builds up the following complex:

The Gerundial Construction

The Gerundial Construction is a predicative complex in which the nominal

part is generally expressed by a noun in the possessive case or a possessive pronoun.

Sometimes, however, the nominal component may be a noun in the common case or

a personal pronoun in the objective case (it is called a half-gerundial construction).

The construction may function as different parts of the sentence:

subject e.g. Your doing nothing won’t help anybody.

predicative e.g. The only way out will be his taking the job.

object e.g. She liked his worrying about his wife.

attribute He had a sudden idea of going to the South in winter.

adverbial modifier of time, attendant circumstances or concession. e.g.

After his being away for some time the crisis came.

LITERATURE

1. Ilyish B.A. The Structure of Modern English. – Л., 1971.

2. Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. – M., 2000

3. Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В., Почепцов Г.Г. Теоретическая грамматика

современного английского языка. – М., 1981.

4. Бархударов Л.С. Очерки по морфологии современного английского языка. –

М., 1975.

5. Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. A University Grammar of English.

– M., 1982.