Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1994. [Vol. 2.] Eger Journal of American Studies. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 22)

STUDIES - Csaba Czeglédi: On the Distribution of Infinitival and Gerundive Complements in English

are always present in the meaning of volitional infinitival complements. Thus, infinitival clauses imply futurity, "sequence of times," "future orientation" as opposed to gerundive complements, which imply simultaneity, "sameness of time," or "present (contemporary, simultaneous) orientation." It is these semantic contrasts, she argues, that are responsible for the grammatical differences between the (a) and (b) examples in (12—15) below. (12) a. He tried to fry the mushrooms, b. He tried frying the mushrooms. (13) a. I have kept this old jacket to give to a jumble sale, b. I keep this old jacket for working in the garden. (14) a. You will need a spanner to tighten that nut b. A spanner is used for tightening nuts. (15) a. John wants to go. b. *John wants going. She extends the 'future orientation versus sameness of time' semantic contrast to the analysis of causative structures. It is asserted that (16) describes two consecutive actions, whereas the -ing complement in (17) refers to an activity that occurred simultaneously with that expressed by the matrix verb. (16) He got her to do the dishes. (17) He got them talking. The same is said to apply to aspectual verbs like begin in (18). (18) a. He began to open all the cupboards, b. He began opening all the cupboards. While Wierzbicka (1988) emphasizes the semantic contrast in relative time reference between the infinitival and gerundive complements of aspectual verbs, Quirk et al. (1985) point to an aspectual difference between 18