Lecture 9: The Gerund

 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

 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?

 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

 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]

 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

 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

 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

 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

 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

 The distribution of a gerund is not like an IP  There are some positions which DPs can go, but not IPs

 Complement of a preposition  he thought about [the problem]  * he though about [that this was a problem]  Subject of a clause with inversion  will [this problem] stop him  * will [that this is a problem] stop him  Cleft position  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

 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

 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:

 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

 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

 In this gerund, the –ing word behaves like a noun  It cannot take a bare DP complement  * the signing the contract  It is modified by an adjective  His reluctant (*reluctantly) signing of the contract  It cannot take auxiliary verbs  * the having signed of the contract  * the being signed

 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

 The poss-ing gerund  John’s eagerly drinking the wine  X-ing = verb  * his eagerly drinking of the wine  * his eager drinking the wine  His having drunk the wine  Subject is obligatory  * the drinking the wine  Only possessive determiner possible  * a drinking the wine  Distributes like DP  The –ing of gerund  John’s eager drinking of the wine  X-ing = noun  * his eager drinking the wine  * his eagerly drinking of the wine  * his having drunk of the wine  Subject is optional  The drinking of the wine  Other determiners are possible  This drinking of the wine  Distributes like DP

 There is a standard distinction made between derivational morphology and inflectional morphology

 Derivational morphology  Forms new words from others  Govern  government  Black  blacken  Run  runner

 Derivational morphology  The derived words have different properties to the one they are derived from  Government  Noun  The body that carries out the political process  Govern  Verb  A political process

 Inflectional Morphology  Forms a new version of the same word  live, lived, living  The derived words differ only from the original in terms of what the inflection adds  Lived  Verb  Process of being alive  Past tense  Live  Verb  Process of being alive  Present tense

 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)

 This is supported by the observations that:  Derivational morphology is (usually) irregular  government; denial; retraction; walk  Which morpheme is used depends on the lexical item it is attached to

 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  make+ed = made; put+ed = put  But typically there IS a regular form (unlike with derivation)

 Derivational Morphology is (typically) non- productive:  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 gerund ‘-ing’:  sometimes changes verbs into nouns  They played football  The playing of football  These suggest that it is a derivational morpheme

 But the gerund ‘-ing’:  is very regular  is very productive  These suggest that it is an inflection

 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

 We start with a verb

 Which projects a VP  The VP can contain a theme

 Here we add the –ing  Which projects an NP  There is nothing to assign Case to the theme

 But with nouns, we can insert an of

 The verb moves to support the bound morpheme

 This NP is the complement of a determiner  There doesn’t have to be a possessor

 But there can be one  If we have the possessive determiner  There is no room for an auxiliary

 We start with the verb

 Which projects a VP with its theme

 We complete the VP with an agentive verb and agent  The agentive verb Case marks the theme  So, no of insertion is needed

 The verb moves to support the abstract verb

 At this point we add the –ing  Which projects an NP  The agent cannot get Case

 The verb moves to support the bound morpheme

 The NP is the complement of a determiner  Which projects a DP

 The agent still needs Case  Only the possessive determiner can assign Case  So no other determiner is possible

 The agent moves to get genitive Case

 We start with the verb

 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

 The verb moves to support the abstract verb

 We add a ‘little v’ expressing the perfect  The agent cannot get Case

 The verb moves to support the little v

 We add –ing, which projects an NP  The verb cannot move to support the bound morpheme

 So an auxiliary must be inserted  Because the following verbal element is the perfect, have is inserted

 Because the agent still needs Case, only the possessive determiner can be used

 The agent moves to get Case from the possessor

 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  [him murdering the lecturer] was not nice  The PRO-ing gerund  [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

 The different gerunds we have analysed differ only in where the gerund morpheme enters into the structure:  The lower down in the structure, the less verbal the construction is  -ing of gerunds (the most nominal one)  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