Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Graduate School of TESOL

Approaches to English Grammar

Spring 2005

Comments and summary on Yule Explaining English Grammar chapter 8, Infinitives and Gerunds.

     The first main distinction Yule makes in this chapter is between the structural form of gerunds and infinitives. Both of them work as complements but infinitives have the base form of the verb and are sometimes preceded by `to` while gerunds have an -ing ending tacked onto the end of the verb.

Yule then goes on to explain that both infinitives and gerunds are non-finite complements because they both have standard forms which do not carry tense or agreement information. This is opposed to finite complements which are often preceded by the word `that` and do carry agreement information.

Yule then divides verbs into four different groups based on their structural properties in relation to complements as well as their basic meaning.

Group 1 verbs take only finite complements. The verbs in this group (suppose, think) indicate mental states.

Group 2 verbs take only infinitive complements. The verbs in this group (choose, decide) indicate future events.

Group 3 verbs take only gerund complements. The verbs in this group (finish, consider) indicate that the situation is in the past.

Group 4 verbs take both gerund and infinitive complements. The verbs in this group indicate the difference already found in groups 2 and 3 above.

Based on this, Yule suggests that gerunds are more noun-like while infinitives are more verb-like. Once more, there are structural and meaning reasons to support Yule`s claim.

Gerunds are often preceded by a noun marker: The killing of the beautiful chicken was a horrible event.

Gerunds are often preceded by a possessive marker: The porcupine`s mother resents her walking to the prom.

Gerunds often indicate concrete events: I planned on going to the bookstore.

Infinitives are never preceded by a possessive marker: *John loves his to walk.

Infinitives often indicate acts: The armadillo chose to eat yams for breakfast.

Infinitives indication less concrete acts: The elephant hoped to be able to sit on the ringmaster.

Taking these distinctions coupled with the basic differences in meaning it is easy to spot differences in the uses of gerunds and infinitives. Having done this, Yule takes us full circle and has us look deeper at three types of verbs that take complements. The three types of verbs he discusses are:

Commitment

     These verbs are followed by infinitive complements and involve some commitment to future action.

Aspectual

These verbs are generally followed by gerund complements. The verbs here do not indicate separate actions in complements. Rather complements are to be interpreted with the main verb. These verbs togther with complements indicate an event that is ongoing and a possibility for repetition exists.

Sensory perception

These verbs take both gerund and bare infinitives. Here again, we can see the difference between the uses of the gerund and the infinitive complements in respect to time.

     EG. John saw his friend sink into the quicksand.

         John saw his friend sinking into the quicksand.

                  Can you feel the difference in time shown by the two of these?

The last thing that Yule talks about in this chapter is linguistic distance. He claims that linguistic distance can be used to account for reasons why we use a to+infinitive instead of a bare infinitive. Since the to+infinitive puts more distance between the two verbs we can assume that there is more conceptual distance between the two. If there is a bare infinitive there is no conceptual distance and we can assume that the two events are happening simultaneously.

     Bob asked her to get out of the house. (he asked her and then, later she left)

     Bob saw her get out of the house.

     Bob saw her getting out of the house.

     Bob saw that she was leaving the house. (She might be leaving right then)