A Dictionary of Cont..

eturning, which is the object of the preposition
of; and the participle intending, which qualifies
the pronoun we. There is another kind of verbal
noun, the infinitive, which can also function as
the subject or the object of a verb, and we have
this too in to visit, which is here the object of
the participle intending. See infinitives.
The Victorian gerundive is treated like a participle
but it is essentially a noun and al!ways
carries the implication of the verbal noun and
not of the adjective. It may be used to qualify
a following noun, but when it is it has the force
of an abbreviated prepositional phrase, as if a
preposition such as for had been omitted. Singing
is a participle in a singing child but not in
e singing lesson. The -ing words are gerundives
and not participles in drinking glasses, walking
sticks, growing pains, writing paper. See ‘cornpound
words.
By Victorian standards a gerundive with an
object could not be used as the subject or the
object of a verb. That is, one could not. say
worshiping idols was forbidden or the law
forbade worshiping idols. The gerund or some
other construction, such as an infinitive or a
clause, was required here. In contemporary
English, the gerundive is used freely as the
subject of a verb, but it is not always acceptable
as an object.
By Victorian standards, a noun or pronoun
standing immediately before the gerund must
be a genitive or possessive. A word standin’g in
this position always represents the subject of
the verbal idea expressed in the gerund. A participle,
on the other hand, may follow an uninflected
noun or a subjective or objective
pronoun, but it cannot qualify a preceding genitive
or possessive. What form a noun or .pronoun
standing before a gerundive and representing
the subject of the action should have, is
a more complicated problem.
During the first half of the nineteenth
century, conservative grammarians claimed that
a genitive or possessive form could not stand
before a gerundive, since an adjective could not
stand in this position. Thackeray was reflecting
conservative speech when he wrote: I insist on
Miss Sharp appearing, rather than Miss Sharp’s
appearing. Noah Webster opposed this tradition.
He claimed that if the preceding word was
the subject of the verbal idea a genitive or
possessive form was required.
Modern grammarians settle a question like
this by counting instances. An examination of
English literature made forty years ago to determine
this point shows that from 1400 to 1900
a possessive pronoun was almost always useal in
preference to an objective pronoun before a
gerundive, and that the genitive form of a noun
was used approximately half the time. Thlere
is no doubt that Webster had a better ear for
English than his opponents. By the end of the
nineteenth century his teachings had been :accepted
as standard, and they are what now
appear in textbooks.
But in the meantime, the eighteenth and
247 -iIlg
early nineteenth century standards had had
their effect. An analysis of the speech of educated
Americans made thirty years ago found
that the common form of the noun was overwhelmingly
preferred to the genitive before a
gerundive and that an objective pronoun was
used in preference to a possessive pronoun
48 percent of the time. In current English it is
more usual to say on Miss Sharp appearing than
on Miss Sharp’s appearing. Either form of the
pronoun may be used. One may say I’m surprised
at his saying that or I’m surprised ot
him saying that without intending any difference
in meaning or emphasis. A possessive form
is often used parallel with a noun in the
common case, as in I can undersfand an Afghan
stealing but I cannot understand his crying. Of
course, if the pronoun itself is the object of a
verb or preposition and the -ing a descriptive
participle, the pronoun must have the objective
form, as in we saw him running.
What has been said applies only to an -ing
construction that is the object of a verb or preposition.
When the -ing is the subject of a verb
some people still prefer a noun in the genitive,
as in the children’s wanting that surprises me;
but the simple form, as in the children wanting
that surprises me, is also acceptable and is preferred
by many. If the noun itself is the subject
of the verb and the -ing a descriptive participle,
only the simple form can be used, as in the
children, wanting some candy, came into the
room. In the case of a pronoun, most people
prefer a possessive form when the -ing is the
subject of a verb, as in their being my friends
makes it worse; but a subjective form, as in
they being my friends makes it worse, is used
too often by good writers to be called anything
but standard. Again, if the pronoun itself is the
subject of the verb a subjective form is required,
as in he, being in a hurry, began to run. but
constructions of this kind are not often used.
In the case of pronouns, the situation is complicated
by the fact that there are three forms
instead of two. A subjective form is often used
where the logic of grammar would require an
objective or possessive form. When the subjective
pronoun is close to the preceding verb or
preposition, as in instead of he converting the
Zulus, the Zulu chief converted him, it is offensive
to most educated people, but not to all.
When a great many words come between the
pronoun and the verb or preposition so that the
construction is obscured, the subjective form is
acceptable to most people, as the they in without
my interfering with their sleep or they with
mine and the he in that would be a motive for
her murdering him, not he her.
An objective pronoun is also heard in a subjective
position, as me in me knowing their
names surprised them and him in it’s no use
him wiring buck. This is in keeping with the
tendency in English to use a subjective pronoun
immediately before a true verb and an objective
form in any other position. Sentences of this
kind are acceptable in speech. That is to say,