|
|
No Bets, We Just Need to Know
<<Sorry,I don't agree UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY is a gerund clause. It's a participial phrase, in which UTILIZING is a present participle. >>
<<Gerunds behave like nouns - they can be subjects or objects. >> eg. "UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY" is the best way to increase profits. noun
< Participial phrases act as adverbs>
Not only. It depends on what they modify. Let’s have a look. Pegging out the washing she dropped a towel. The participial phrase modifies “dropped”, acts as an adverbial (like an adverb). The woman pegging out the washing is my sister. The participial phrase modifies “the woman”, acts as an attribute (like an adjective). Pegging out the washing is her hubby’s chore, not hers. It’s a gerundial phrase, acts as a subject (like a noun).
<<< Participial phrases act as adverbs>
Not only. It depends on what they modify. Let’s have a look. Pegging out the washing she dropped a towel. The participial phrase modifies “dropped”, acts as an adverbial (like an adverb). The woman pegging out the washing is my sister. The participial phrase modifies “the woman”, acts as an attribute (like an adjective). Pegging out the washing is her hubby’s chore, not hers. It’s a gerundial phrase, acts as a subject (like a noun). >> Correct. I had already stated the adjective use of the participle. But the phrase "utilizing the new technology" the way it's used in the example is a noun. There's isn't any doubt about it.
<But the phrase "utilizing the new technology" the way it's used in the example is a noun. There's isn't any doubt about it. >
Yes, there is. Wherever there's a gerund or a gerund phrase, we can substitute it with a noun. UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY" is the best way to increase profits. = THIS METHOD is the best way to increase profits. I remember SEEING YOU SOMEWHERE. = I remember THE FACT. He has no experience of DEALING WITH ELDERLY PATIENTS. = He has no experience of SUCH WORK. Etc. Can we substitute it with a noun in "Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? " No, we can't, can we? But we can substitute with an adjective: Does the applicant have NECESSARY experience ?
<<Can we substitute it with a noun in "Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? " No, we can't, can we?
But we can substitute with an adjective: >> YES. Yes we can. I like how you "conveniently" put an "of" in this following expression: <<He has no experience *of* DEALING WITH ELDERLY PATIENTS. = He has no experience *of* SUCH WORK. Etc. >> You did this in order to make your idea work. No one would ever say "of" here--it makes no sense > "He has no experience DEALING WITH ELDERLY PATIENTS" is how one would say it (making it analogous to the original question). But "of" is inferred/understood. JUST like "with" is understood in "with utilizing the new technology" (historic precedence for this is found in older forms of English where an a- prefix was attached to the Gerund: eg. "I went a-fishing" which was a corruption of "I went on fishing/ I went on [a] fishing[excusion]. 'fishing here is *not* a participle {the excusion doesn't fish}, it's a NOUN) <<Wherever there's a gerund or a gerund phrase, we can substitute it with a noun. >> He has no experience running. Likewise, if it were a PARTICIPLE (i.e. an adjective), we should be able to substitute it with another adjective yeah? He has no experience blue He has no experience friendly He has no experience expensive You're confused.
<<Can we substitute it with a noun in "Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY?>>
Infinitives are verbal nouns much like gerunds. In many instances they can substitute for one another and their form is distinct enough to help us see the difference Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? Does the applicant have experience TO USE THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? I would have to go with it being a noun too.
<<Pegging out the washing she dropped a towel.
The participial phrase modifies “dropped”, acts as an adverbial (like an adverb). >> btw, how can this be correct? 'Pegging out the washing' is not a participial phrase acting as an adverbial, but a gerund phrase acting as an adverbial. 'Pegging' here is a noun as well > [Upon/While] Pegging out the washing, she dropped a towel. we need to seriously re-analyse the English language
There are quite a few "guests", how inconvenient for a discussion... Can it be the same contributor?
<Likewise, if it were a PARTICIPLE (i.e. an adjective), we should be able to substitute it with another adjective yeah? He has no experience blue He has no experience friendly He has no experience expensive > A spurious argument. Adjectives in postposition - why on Earth? If you can substitute an attributive phrase with an adjective it doesn't mean you should keep the original order. <I like how you "conveniently" put an "of" in this following expression> I did that to turn it into a gerund, they typically go after prepositions, like nouns. Before doing this I consulted a dictionary to make sure what preposition should follow "experience". If you insist it's elliptical - the preposition is omitted for some reason, that's an altogether another kettle of fish. Without it I just don't see any syntactic similarity to a noun. To another guest: <Infinitives are verbal nouns much like gerunds> Not much. <Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? Does the applicant have experience TO USE THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? > Don't you see the meaning is different? Right, some verbs can be followed either by a gerund or an infinitive, but this is not the case.
I am "guest" with a small 'g'. All posts above as "guest" were made by me.
Still, Humble, you have failed to convince me that it is a participial phrase created from "UTILIZING" being an adjective/present participle. In that, you continue to err. Sorry Dude. It's the facts.
<<Does the applicant have experience TO USE THE NEW TECHNOLOGY?
>> This may change the meaning slightly, but we're not talking about meaning here. You said that you couldn't follow it with another NOUN. >["Can we substitute it with a noun in "Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? " No, we can't, can we? "] The above example proves that you CAN. The adjective substitution doesn't work. "UTILIZING" in the phrase is not employed as an Adjective.
I decided to go with "gerund" and possibly "object complement". I think Humble has the question behind the question. When do we use infinitives and when do we use gerunds? This is easy for native speakers, but not so easy even for some very good speakers of English.
I'll add that this was a tough question. Besides those who have posted
replies, at least six other people have been discussing this. I don't follow trends in grammar, but all of them have their reasons for why they call "utilizing" a different term. Thank-you for your comments. I haven't lost sleep over this, but it was really bothering one person. Not kidding.
So guest, I failed to convince you? No wonder, if you can't even see the difference between
<Does the applicant have experience UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? Does the applicant have experience TO USE THE NEW TECHNOLOGY? > Besides, we talk different grammar languages - I do not accept collocations like "AS an adjective/noun" etc. <I think Humble has the question behind the question. When do we use infinitives and when do we use gerunds? > Absolutely not, that's easy, OP. <I decided to go with "gerund" and possibly "object complement">. Do you mean it's a gerund acting as an object complement? There hasn't been any proof UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY in the original sentence behaves sintactically like a noun. I am eager to see it.
<<There hasn't been any proof UTILIZING THE NEW TECHNOLOGY in the original sentence behaves sintactically like a noun. I am eager to see it. >>
I'm slowly starting to realize that you will never see it... |