6

I know that a gerund is a noun, so it should be modified by an adjective. However, it is also a verb form. Can I modify it by using an adverb?

tchrist
  • 134,759
Worawit Tepsan
  • 199
  • 1
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
    "A gerund behaves as a verb within a clause (so that it may be modified by an adverb or have an object); but the resulting clause as a whole (sometimes consisting of only one word, the gerund itself) functions as a noun within the larger sentence." That's straight from the Wikipedia article. Emphasis mine. – RegDwigнt Nov 10 '13 at 16:03
  • 1
    Yes, an adjective *or* an adverb, but not both. "Slow and careful reading" or "reading slowly and carefully", but not *"slow reading carefully". – Peter Shor Nov 10 '13 at 16:40
  • @RegDwigt: Yes, but I thought we had all agreed that Wikipedia doesn't count as a general reference? The thing is that it is more efficient to present it as a specific question with a specific answer, rather than a long article that you have to browse through to find the bit of info you need. It's not even in the introduction of the article, in this case. Secondly, Wikipedia is very succinct here, with few examples and little explanation of the principles behind it. I've added some relevant information about what happens when it is treated more like a noun, for example. And what Peter says. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Nov 10 '13 at 16:42
  • No, a gerund is a verb. A gerund clause is when you use that whole non-fitite verb clause as an NP to be another verb’s subject or object, or as a prepositional object. Different thing completely. Phrases don’t have parts of speech — but they can and do serve as an interchangeable syntactic constituent that’s equivalent to the one-word noun or verb or adjective or adverb. – tchrist Jan 02 '19 at 03:07
  • 1
    Related: https://english.stackexchange.com/a/479169 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/66 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/346877 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/388099 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/428552 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/435916 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/428044 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/154886 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/366906 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/13860 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/148670 https://english.stackexchange.com/q/358212 – tchrist Jan 02 '19 at 03:11
  • 1
    Also related. There’s a million more where those come from. – tchrist Jan 02 '19 at 03:12

1 Answers1

14

If you modify a gerund "from the outside", you treat it as a noun, and so you use an adjective:

That's quick thinking! (= that is a quick act of thinking)

I heard a faint rustling of feathers or clothes.

When emphasising the nominal aspect of a gerund as above, this normally corresponds with expressing the agent of the action with of. When you use a or an, this forces you to emphasise the nominal aspect.

But you can also modify a gerund from within the gerundial construction, where it functions as a verb, so you use an adverb:

She left by quickly crossing the street and hailing a cab.

I don't like speaking softly when there is no need.

Emphasising the verbal aspect of a gerund as above usually corresponds with not expressing the agent at all within the gerundial construction (but rather outside of it, e.g as the subject of the main clause, or the object, or whatever).

Community
  • 1
Cerberus - Reinstate Monica
  • 61,585
  • I've deleted my answer in deference to Cerberus' response. It is always great to learn something from this forum. My thanks to both of you. – Michael Owen Sartin Nov 05 '13 at 02:37
  • 2
    @MichaelOwenSartin: You are too kind! I am obsessed with gerunds. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Nov 05 '13 at 02:41
  • 2
    No, the -ing form modified by an adjective is always a noun, not a gerund. Evidence is that it never takes a direct object (because nouns can't take direct objects). – Greg Lee Jan 02 '19 at 03:24
  • @GregLee: And why is the test "can have direct object" conclusive on its own? That conclusiveness requires motivation. Gerunds are clearly somewhere in between nouns and verbs or both, so they will not conform too all the normal criteria of one group or the other, and a single simple criterion would be unlikely to be fair. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 02 '19 at 10:56
  • 1
    @Cerberus, That makes sense. However, the -ing word which is modified by an adjective acts only like a noun -- it has no verbal properties. It can be preceded by an article like other nouns, and modified by other noun modifiers, and it cannot take an adverb modifier (unlike a verb). "Gerund" is not a part of speech -- it's a verb, nothing but a verb, and it is not intermediate between noun and verb. It may fool you into thinking it's a noun, but that doesn't make it one. – Greg Lee Jan 02 '19 at 11:40
  • @GregLee: All right, so you're saying that the noun-like use (e.g. when preceded by an article) of the (non-participial) -ing word excludes any verbal properties. But how about the other way around, in its verb-like use? Can it have no nominal properties then? – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 02 '19 at 15:36
  • @Cerberus, Yes. The -ing words in question are either verbs or nouns. One can't always tell which, but they are one or the other. (-ing also forms adjectives.) I see people say that a gerund acts like a noun, but aside from it occurring in a NP, there is no truth to this, so far as I know. – Greg Lee Jan 02 '19 at 16:25
  • @GregLee: So, when someone says "the situation was resolved by talking", would you say it is verbal, nominal, or both, and why? – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 03 '19 at 00:38
  • @Cerberus, since "talking" could be modified by either an adjective or an adverb, "the situation was resolved by rapid/rapidly talking", it's either a noun or a verb. – Greg Lee Jan 03 '19 at 01:14
  • @GregLee: You say "either": but we have this one sentence, we have no rapid nor rapidly. And it is a perfectly normal use of of the word. So we need to analyse it as it is. And adding rapid or rapidly does not change the syntax nor the semantics of the rest of the sentence, nor yet does it change the relation between the -ing word and the rest of the sentence. To me, it follows from this that the nominal nature of the word exists always, for it can always be used as a direct object, prepositional object, etc.—all quite important features and typical of a noun. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 03 '19 at 11:55
  • @Cerberus, It is NPs that are direct objects, prepositional objects, etc., not nouns. It is important to keep straight about this, since we are dealing with gerunds, which are NPs but not nouns. NPs are part of syntax; nouns are part of morphology. Other NPs which are not headed by nouns are that-clauses and to-infinitives. – Greg Lee Jan 03 '19 at 12:11
  • @GregLee: I carefully tried to avoid saying they were nouns because I know some people are sensitive about this: I said they behaved like nouns and were like nouns. I'm not good with abbreviations: what is NP? Noun phrase, perhaps? Have you read my answer, and what part of it do you disagree with? // I think the problem here is only one of definition: you use the word "gerund" differently from the way I use it. // I also think these forms, whatever you call them, are not completely distinct; they're just different but closely related uses of the same form, variations on the same construction. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 03 '19 at 13:42
  • @Cerberus, "NP"s are arguments. It's too bad that term "NP" leads you to think something is a noun, or like a noun, if it leads you to think that a verb is a noun, or like a noun. What's in a name? Calling arguments "NP"s doesn't make the things in them nouns. It's bad reasoning. I've pointed out to you other NPs that don't have nouns. What else can I do? What if everyone started calling them DP? – Greg Lee Jan 03 '19 at 19:31
  • @GregLee: I will assume that "NP" stands for noun phrase. Now you've added another short abbreviation, which is not easy to Google. A phrase is not a noun, nor is each word in a noun phrase a noun, but a noun phrase is called that because it behaves like a noun, e.g. it can be direct object, object of a preposition, etc.; in short, it can replace, and be replaced with, a noun without changing the rest of the syntax of the sentence. I think that is a good test; in fact, I think that is its definition, isn't it? // Again, I think your issue here is of the definition of the term gerund. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jan 03 '19 at 21:44