Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1989. 19/3. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 19)
Abkarovits, Endre: Contradictions in Describing and Using the -ing Form as Object. (Complement)
patterns, we nan only draw the attention of the learner to some more problematical (joints. In this situation the only thing we can eta is to rely on the information that certain reference books can offer. But can we really depend on the patterns and lists of the most widely used dictionaries and grammar books? My impression, before examining and comparing these books thoroughly, was that their lists differ to a large extent, they select their verbs haphazardly sometimes, and even the dictionaries seem to he misleading, incomplete, or inaccurate in some places. Hornby seems to agree when giving similar examples: 'The ordinary grammar book and dictionary often fail to supply adequate information on such points.' (Hornby: XVII) (That is another matter that even his dictionary is not always exempt of these problems.) When T set out to write this paper, my aim was to check whether my earlier impressions were correct, whether these verbs, that can be fallowed by the -ijncj form, are really described in contradicting, incomplete lists and patterns, or not. A relatively complete list of the most common verbs of this type might result from such an investigation, tielpinq students and teachers to use these verbs and their complementation in some correct way. Before giving the table, let me however mention a few general points concerning the terms and categories of the -ing form. What termino log y shou 1. d be emp 1 oyed? Many learners of English find It senseless to call the -i n g form in the various constructions by different names. They are however in good company, as even grammarians do not always meks the distinction. (Quirk et alias call all 3ing forms participles in their books. The Longman dictionaries call both types 'the -ing form'. Hornby uses both terms, but the most contraversia! pattern (19C) is described as -ing form (meaning both gerund and participle dependina on the form of its logical subject), Corder uses 'gerund' god 'participle' alternatively where participle is used by most authors, Scheuerweghs, 7andvoort, Allan, Ganshina, Graver, Swan distinguish at least between The two main types ) If a grammarian makes the distinction, he usually does it on the basis of certain characteristics It is quite generally accepted that besides some verb characteristics that are typical of all (or most)
