MINISTRY OF EDUCATION Moldova State University Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures English Philology Department

Graduation Thesis

The Gerund and the Participle I (In English and Romanian)

Written by: Research Adviser

Chiinu 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.3 CHAPTER I. Gerund and Participle I (in English and Romanian) on the Emic Level 1.1. 1.2. The Lexico-Grammatical Categories of the English Verbals . The Origin and Development of the English Gerund/ Participle

1.2.1. The-ing Form in OE . 1.2.2. Middle English Characteristics of the-ing Form 1.2.3. Early Modern English-ing Form Development . 1.2.4. Modern English-ing Form (Gerund) 1.3. The Origin and Development of the Romanian Gerunziul and Participle . 1.4. The English Gerund and its Functions .. 1.4.1. The Use of the Gerund 1.4.2. Grammatical Characteristics .... 1.4.3. Long Infinitive (with to) and Gerund .. 1.5. The English Participle I and its Functions 1.5.1. Lexico-Grammatical Properties of Participle I 1.6. The Functions of the Romanian Gerunziul 1.6.1. The Characteristics of the Romanian Gerunziul...... 1.7. The Differentiation between Gerund and Present Participle. 1.7.1. Identification of the Gerund-Participle I. Correlation in their Reference to Each Other CHAPTER II. Various Modalities of Translating Gerund and Participle I from English into Romanian. 2.1.1 The Ways of Interpreting Participle I from English into Romanian.. 2.1.2 The Ways of Interpreting Gerund into Romanian

INTRODUCTION One of the most striking features of Modern English is the system of the non-finite forms of the verb. Their dual grammatical nature, both verbal and nominal (or adverbial-adjectival) and their wide use in predicative constructions have been discussed in great detail by the authors of theoretical and practical grammar courses. This topic presents certain theoretical difficulties, which are still a matter of dispute among grammarians. The task of the present research is to consider the main arguments put forward by different scholars, to sustain and weigh each of them, and to find the most convincing way of solving this problem. The Gerund and Participle I in English and Romanian languages is an ambitious investigation of the lexical-grammatical approach, which is very important since the speakers (writers) way of interpretation of a fact, mood, or state plays a huge role in everyday life. A lot may depend on the way a phrase is said, a request is made, or an order is given. The present thesis is a contrastive study of the approaches and proposes to present sufficient data of the practical rules of using them in two languages. One of the Objectives of this work is to contribute to the setting up of expressing of approaches, working with as diverse as possible language data, endorsed via different style registers (literary, official, family). Another aim is to study the manifestations of approaches in English and Romanian, and also to analyze gerundial and participial constructions, to shed some new light in terms of generative grammar on old problems related to the origin and development of the gerundive nominal in English. It is true that the gerundive nominal has been extensively dealt with in handbooks and special treatises, but there has never been any general agreement among scholars as to the origin or further development of the so-called verbal gerund in English. We have to carry out a deep analysis in the sphere of the Gerund and Participle in both languages and find the basic similarities and differences between them. Methodology is attributed a huge role in this diploma thesis: that of a bridge between the theory and practice. Their interrelation is obvious, for none of them taken separately, presents so much an interest to any grammarian. The theory emerges from practice, which is inevitable since it is the everyday life reality. The practice supports the theory, which is also unavoidable in view of the fact that it is vital in knowing how to express the everyday reality.

The study is based on the method of the contextual and comparative analysis, and that of the linguistic experiment. Examples from literary works have been used and included different style registers. Chapter I (Gerund and Participle I (in English and Romanian) on the Emic Level) is a study of a number of publications on the subject, an investigation of the relevance of the concepts proposed within the theoretical framework of approaches; and an attempt to systematize the various approaches to the Gerund and Participle I in the proposed languages. Chapter II (Various Modalities of Translating Gerund and Participle I from English into Romanian.). The aim for the chapter II is confront the English Gerund and Participle characteristics with their Romanian equivalents on etic level. We know that the English gerund and Participle I has been translated into Romanian in different ways. There is no certain gerundial construction in English that can have a specific equivalent in Romanian, but more often we find modul conjunctiv. As a matter of fact the English gerund can be rendered into Romanian as different parts of speech, as gerund, infinitive, participle and present indicative. Participle I is more often confronted with the Romanian Gerunziul. The illustrations are supported by relevant conclusions as to the proper use of the lexicalgrammatical means of expressing approaches.

CHAPTER I. Gerund and Participle I (In English and Romanian)

1.1 The lexico-grammatical meaning of the English verbals. 1. It is but natural that the verb should take up as much, or indeed, more space than all the other parts of speech put together. It is the only part of speech in the present day English that has a morphological system based on a series of categories. It is the only part of speech that has analytical forms, and again the only one that has forms which occupy a peculiar position in its system and do not share some of the characteristic features of the part of speech as a whole'. The main division within the paradigm of the verb is that between the finite and non-finite, i.e. predicative and non-predicative forms of the verb. The problem of correlating predicative and non- predicative forms is the main point in defining the boundary of the verb as a lexical unit. The English verbids include four forms-distinctly differing from one another within the general verbid system: the infinitive, the gerund, the present participle and the past participle. From these characteristics, one might call in question the very justification of including the verbids in the system of the verb. The ground for raising such a problem is quite substantial since the verbals are regarded in most grammars as forms of the verb because they have some features in common with the finite forms; but at the same time they have their own peculiarities, which distinguish them from the finite forms. The lexico-grammatical meaning of the verbids, though essentially that of a verb (they denote action), has something of the lexico-grammatical meanings of other parts of speech. [45, 118] The gerund, for instance, denotes an action partially treated as a substance. Thus, in the sentence "Going there put an end to her anxiety" the gerund "going'", though denoting an action, presents it at the same time as a substance which produced the act of putting an end to something. The participle denotes a "qualifying action", i.e. an action presented as a property of some substance (like an adjective) or a circumstance of another action (like an adverb). E.g. "He looked at his son with twinkling eyes" (the participle like an adjective).[50, 47] "Let me do it" he said kneeling beside her. (the participle like an adverb). Thus, on the one hand, both finite and non-finite forms of the verb denote an action; on the other hand, their meaning is different since in the verbals a meaning of a thing or characteristics is added to the main meaning. 5

If we compare the syntactical characteristics of the finite and non-finite forms we see that the functions of the verbids in the sentence are different from those of the finite verb. The latter regularly functions as the predicate of the sentence. The verbids are, as a rule, not used in this function. But they are used in most other functions. The strict division of functions (the functions themselves being of a fundamental nature in terms of the grammatical structure of a language as a whole) clearly shows that the opposition between the finite and non-finite forms of the verb creates a special grammatical category. The differential feature of the opposition is formed by the expression of verbal time and mood.-while the time-mood grammatical signification characterizes the finite verb in a way that it underlines its finite predicative function, the verbid has no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorical semantics and therefore presents the weak member of the opposition. As to their syntactic connections, there is again duality in their combinability. They form connections with adverbs, nouns, pronouns (denoting objects of action) like finite verbs, and with finite verbs, like nouns or adverbs. [45, 118] In so far as the verbals make up a part of the English verb system, they have some features in common with the finite forms, and in so far as they are singled out amid the forms of the verb, they must have some peculiarities of their own. It is clear that none of the verbals has the category of person and mood. The English verbals have no category of number either, though it is not so in some other languages. What we must examine is the categories of aspect, tense, correlation and voice. Still, it is not easy to define universal morphological categories for predicative and nonpredicative forms of the verb. [10,106] The problem of the category of tense and that of correlation has to be considered together in order to make clear what category is at the base of the following oppositions in the infinitive. [45,136] Thus, we may notice that the category of correlation is much more universal in the Modem English verb than that of tense: correlation appears in all forms of the English verb, both finite and non-finite, except the imperative, while tense is only found in the indicative mood and nowhere else. Since the verbals are hardly ever the predicate of a sentence, they do not express the category of tense in the way the finite verb forms do. In other words, we may say that the opposition of the finite verbs and the verbals is based on the expression of the functions of full predication and semi - predication. 6

In addition to these characteristics, we should mention that, like the finite forms of the verb, the verbals have a distinction between active and passive. As to other possible voices (reflexive, reciprocal, and middle) there is no reason whatever to treat the verbals in a different way from the finite forms. Thus, if we deny the existence of these voices in the finite forms, we must also deny it in the verbals. It is very important to mention that the verbids have special morphemes distinguishing them from the finite verb. They are: the suffix -ing of the gerund, the suffixes -ing, -en, -ed, etc. of the participle and the word-morpheme to of the infinitive. These morphemes are peculiar. They are not lexical or lexico-grammatical morphemes because they do not characterize all the words of the verb lexeme. If we compare, for instance, the suffixes -ize, and -ing in realizes, has realized, to realize, realizing, being realized we see that .the suffix -ize is found in every word of the lexeme, the suffix -ing only in some words. The -ing morpheme differs from grammatical morphemes as well. Grammatical morphemes are used to form grammatical opposemes. E.g. asks-asked-'will ask. The suffix -ing of the gerund is not used to form any grammatical opposemes. It serves to oppose all the gerund to all the nongerunds. Thus it is a peculiar group-suffix within the verb lexeme. The same could be said about the homonymous -ing suffix of the participle. But two additional remarks are necessary: 1. The participial -ing morpheme does not unite all the system of the participle. The so-called participle II (written, asked) has different suffixes. 2. Since participle I is used to form analytical 'continuous aspect' grammemes, the -ing sufix of the participle has become a grammatical morpheme of the finite verb as well. The suffixes of Participle II are not group-suffixes because participle II is a one-word system. In all other respects they resemble the participial -ing suffix. They are used as grammatical morphemes participating in the formation of' passive voice' and 'perfect order' grammemes. Of great interest is the to word-morpheme of the infinitive. It is a word-morpheme because it has only the form of a separate word, but not the content, and it functions as part of a word. It is a group-morpheme (like -ing), but unlike the participial -ing it is not used as a grammatical morpheme. Given these peculiarities, it would be quite appropriate to define the paradigmatic relations in which the verbals may occur. Since up to now the traditional grammar has treated the English verbals from the point of view of their syntactical functions and has avoided the issue of their paradigmatic relationships. This fact was due to the great number of function in which the non7

predicative forms of the verb occur. It is difficult to find all the verbals in one and the same syntactical function. Still, such a function exists, namely when they perform the function of the attributive. The category, which marks the infinitive in contrast to the gerund and participle, is called the Category of Modal Representation. While analyzing the "ing" form and the Participle II put in contrast, one may notice that their relationships can be regarded as a special grammatical category. [11, 153] The category which marks the ing form in contrast to Part II is called the Category of Voice Aspectual Representation. To sum up, the system of the grammatical categories of the English verbals may be rendered as follows: Infinitive Modal Representation the "ing" form Voice aspectual representation Participle II Still, it should be mentioned that such opposition occurs but seldom, for the non-predicative forms of the verb possess a great variety functions and very often this difference may become subject to neutralization in various systemic or contextual conditions.

1.2. The Origin and Development of the English Gerund and Participle I In a natural human language, which is permanently in a state of flux, even when the synchronic view is taken, there are always changes taking place many of them with sufficient speed to be noticed by the users themselves. Thus, in the process of our investigation we came to the necessity to state the historical development and evolution of the English Gerund and Participle I. We studied them following the historical periods. These periods were delimited in the book The History of English Language. 1.2.1. The Old English Period -ing Form As Ganshina mentioned, the Gerund is a descendant of the Old English verbal noun and the present participle; hence its double nature and its noun and verb characteristics. [37, 268] In the Early Old English that is from the first records of the English language up to at least the 10th century there is no nominalization that can qualify as a gerund. The authors of English theoretical books depicted that the verbal noun had, in that period, the endings -ing and -ung. Originally, these suffixes were morphologically marked. Verbs belonging to the first weak class took -ing and verbs of the second weak class took -ung. During Late Old English and Early Middle English -ung was replaced by -ing. There are instances of concrete 8

ung/-ing derivatives in such an early text as Beowulf. Normally, however, the suffix is used to form an abstract noun denoting the action or state of the verb from which it is derived. These derived nominals are always feminine and have the strong feminine declension. They are used both as nominal actionis and as nomina actionis. The Old English ancestor of the modern gerund was a noun that named the action of a related verb, like modern arrival, participation. If had all the regular noun inflections and was used with the definite article and often followed by a prepositional phrase: the coming of the ship, the stealing of the horse. It is very important to understand how did the -ing ending enter the English verbal system. In view of historical concepts it is surprising that the English language has developed a grammatical category on the basis of a flexive; and from the comparative point of view English differentiates itself from all the other Germanic languages in exploiting the -ing ending in its verbal system.

Foreign Influence in Old English Despite this potential influence Nickel makes the usual distinction between original Old English works and more or less literal translations and glosses. In many translations the Latin influence is only indirect, as in some of Alfreds works. Nickel argues against any Latin influence on the origin of the expanded (progressive) form in English. Scheler has studied potential cases of borrowed syntax in Old English. Perfectly clear cases of borrowed syntax are not well attested if we do not regard the extension of already existing rues to cover new domains as cases of borrowed syntax. Latin, or rather the Latin education of most Old English writers, must at least have influenced the style of written Old English. In good Old English translations there is not usually a slavish imitation of eth Latin original. In my work hypothesis is entertained that only those borrowings that would fir already existing syntactic structures would have remained and developed in the English language. All attested unambiguous examples of Old English -ing forms followed by an accusative object are interlinear glosses or slavish imitations of the Latin original. Since Visser has included all examples found in other sources, they will not be repeated here. The extent to which Latin influenced Old English has been a matter of much scholarly dispute. Sometimes a clear distinction is made between original Old English woks and so-called independent translations on the one hand and dependent translations and glosses on the other. Latin, or rather the Latin education of most Old English writers, must at least have influenced the style of written Old English. In Old English translation there is not usually a slavish imitation of the Latin original The hypothesis is entertained that only those borrowings that would fit already existing syntactic structures would have remained and developed in the English language. 9

Only the verbal gerunds that have been found in Old English texts are prepositional gerund based on action verbs. They are all slavish imitations of Latin Originals. The factive gerund may have been the -ung/-ing nominal predicated by emotive predicates like: lician, the -ung/-ing nominal in instrumental phrases and the present participle in absolute constructions in causative contexts. We may conclude that the only verbal gerunds that have been found in Old English texts are prepositional gerunds based on action verbs. They are all slavish imitations of Latin originals. Possible germs of the factive gerund may have been the -ung/-ing nominal predicated by emotive predicates like lician, the -ung/-ing nominal in instrumental phrases and the present participle in absolute constructions in causative contexts.

1.2.2. Middle English Characteristics of the -ing Form The rise of the so-called verbal gerund takes place essentially within the Middle English period. In Middle English, however, it verbal meaning grew stronger so that it was sometimes modified by an adverb and might take a subject or object instead of the prepositional modifier: The ships coming, stealing the horse. It was also extended widely in use until it became possible to make a gerund of almost any verb in the language. We still take our choice between the old noun of action, proceed by the and followed by of, and the new gerund: E.g:Mulroy was arrested for the stealing of the horse. Mulroy was arrested for stealing the horse. Only in the constructions without the article are stealing gerunds. The stealing is a simple noun of action, like the arrival, the theft.

Foreign Influence In Old English the strongest foreign influence comes from Latin. In Middle English the French or Anglo-Norman influence has also to be taken into account. Einenkel has stressed the importance of the French influence on the rise of the English gerund and there is reason to believe that French may have influenced English superficial structures or at least reinforced native tendencies. Before the simplification of the morphological case features occurs, the difference between a nominal gerund and a verbal gerund is after all only a difference in the sub-feature of 10

[-Nominative]: after the nominal gerund we have the sub-feature [+Genitive] and after the verbal gerund we have the sub-feature [+Accusative]. After the drastic simplification of the rules for morphological case assignment, we may assume the existence of a general rule in English, which inserts of in the environment +N NP when these are dominated by a common node. If we assume that gerunds are both [+V] and [+N], we need only state the of-insertion rule so that it is optional in the environment [+N/+V] [IIP]. It can be argued that a change of a morphological sub-feature is not a case of borrowed syntax. At least it is not a case of borrowed syntax where a pre-existing deep structure was lacking. Additional tenses are later. Late Middle English was to see the development also of a perfect, a pluperfect and a future, but none of these can be said to be really current till about 1700.

1.2.3. Early Modern English During the early sixteenth century and the Elizabethan Age the Renaissance made itself strongly felt. There was an ardent revival in the study of Greek and Latin. Classical models may again have influenced style especially that of scholarly English prose. By this time the suffixes of the present participle and the gerund have become identical. The of-insertion rule after gerunds is still optional. The first record-ed instances of -ing forms expressing time relations by means of grammatical or formal tense are examples of present participles functioning as reduced clauses: How if some infidels as Turkeys, or Sarasins haying heard of Christes names, did long to knowe his scripture. [52, 442] The -ing noun had begun to develop gerundial force in Middle English; it had acquired the additional features of a verb. The norm of present-day usage was achieved in Early Modern English. A direct object is now the rule unless the -ing form is preceded by the definite article. But Early Modern English was still inconsistent with regard to the form of the object. E.g.: Bacon has and set their hearts upon creating of an order, sometimes upon the advancing of a person. The -ing form originally had its subject in the genitive (I insist on his/the soldiers obeying orders), and from Middle English on it could also be in the form of an of-phrase. A common case subject has been sporadically recorded since late Middle English, but gains increasing currency down through Early Modern English. 11

E.g. I have nothing against the man trying to do it. The profilation of his type of subject is no doubt due to the incapacity of many words, or word groups, to appear in the genitive. The first recorded instances of -ing forms expressing time relations by means of grammatical or formal tense are examples of present participles functioning as reduced clauses: E.g.: How if some infidels as Turks, or Sarasins having heard of Christs name, did long to know his scripture. Usually, however, a simple -ing form expresses the time-relation that is now expressed by having plus the past participle of the verb. A few examples illustrating the use of flip verbs in Elizabethan English will show us that these verbs create the right context for sentential factive gerundive nominals to arise, since they can predicate that clauses and instrumental gerunds which may function as non-prepositional subject if there is no Agent present. The close relationship between factive gerundive nominals and present participles becomes really obvious in the following example: Methodes are more fit to winne consent, or belufe, but lesse fit to point to Action; for they carrie a kind of Demonstration in Orbe Circle, one part illuminating another; and therefore satisfies of the advancement of learning. (Bacon) A Present Participle in an absolute construction plus a causative verb is equivalent to a factive instrumental gerund. As a conclusion first the action type gerund coalesced with the present participle in Middle English. The possible germs of the factive gerundive nominal suggested in the section on Old English have been followed up to early Modern English, by which time the sentential factive gerundive nominal is practically fully developed.

1.2.4. Modern English Period John Drydens prose works (1655 1700) are often associated with the beginning of Modern English Prose. As is evident from Sderlinds extensive studies on the verb syntax in Drydens prose, there are a number of differences, between Drydens use of nominalizations in -ing and present-day English usage. Sentential factive gerundive nominals are, however, quite, well represented:

12

E.g.: This noble person having been pleased to give them a commendation, which I presume not to insert, has made me vain enough to boast of so great a favour. The factive gerundive nominals are followed by causative verbs. During the Early Modern English period grammarians were mostly concerned with spelling and pronunciation. From the 18th century onwards-prescriptive grammarians trying to lay down lows for good usage have also been interested in syntactic structures. Armstrong and Visser having discussed the extent to which the dicta of grammarians may have influenced the usage of nominalizations in -ing. The dual nature of the Gerund, that is the fact that it is verb and noun simultaneously, has been the main cause of concern. The opinions and definitions of different eighteenth and nineteenth century grammarians are extremely diverse. Since Visser quotes a great number of the rules given by prescriptive grammarians, only one point is added here. According to Armstrong, Lindley Murrag not only requires of after an -ing form proceeded by the definite article but also after an -ing form governed by noun or pronoun in the possessive case. In Present-day English, the surface structure of nominalizations that are transforms of deep structure factive sentences look different, but in all likelihood it is only a question of surface differences. A cursory comparison between nineteenth century novels on the one hand and more recent twentieth century novels on the other seems to indicate that sentential factive gerundive nominals expressing agent, time and voice occur less frequently today than they did in the 19th century. In conclusion, we can say that: the Gerund is a descendant of the Old English verbal noun and the present participle, hence its double nature and its noun and verb characteristics. The diachronical approach to the problem testifies in favor of the common form. In the Old English period the verbal noun had the endings -ing, -ung; in Middle English the ending was -ing(e). The present participle in Old English was replaced by inge as the result of the confusion of constructions with the verbal noun and the participle. Thus, the verbal noun and the particle became merged into one form with -ing(e), the Modern -ing. The phonetic shapes of the Old English Participle I in -ende and the Old English verbal noun in inge were too different to be mixed by chance, without any semantic grounds. Probably, it was a certain likeness between the forms that made it possible for two forms to be united into one. As 13

the result of the blending of the two forms, the verbal noun in -ing began to develop verbal characteristics under the influence of the participle. In constructions where in Middle English and in Early Modern English the verbal noun, like any other noun was precede by the definite article and followed by the preposition of.

1.3. The Origin and Development of the Romanian Gerund and Participle Participle From among all the participial forms, existent in Latin, the oriental Romanic languages have inherited only that of the passive (perfect) past participle. Since the period of the classic Latin this was a very productive category, except for the future one. This type of the participle was common only for the transitive verbs. In the popular Latin, the passive past participle has spread to the intransitive verbs, representing the only form of this mood, inherited by the Romanic languages. The passive past participles in Latin had the following endings: tus (lanfatus, mutates, auditus); sus (cessus, missus, aussus); utus (imbutus, minutus); -itus (venditus, redditus). From the point of view of the stress there were distinguished 2 types of the participle: 1) Forms with the stress on the plural vowel of the root (weak participle). 2) Forms with the stress on the root (strong participle). The weak participle group included the participles in: tus from all the 4 conjugations with the weak perfects in. -avi, -evi, -ivi, -ii (arma-tus, dele-tus, audi-tus). The (e)tus participles came out of use together with the -evi perfects. The rest of the conjugation gave regular reflexes. The strong participle group included the: itus participles with the strong perfect in -ui (dolitus), in -tus from the consonant root verbs (scrib-e-re scriptus) and in -sus from the -d/-t (rid-e-re risus) root verbs. A large spread is known by the participles in -utus, the number of which in classical Latin was limited, being characteristic only to the -u root verbs (imbutus imbuere). Similarly to the perfect, new participles in -utus were created (habutus after habui). 14

The form changes from among the participles took place not just due to the correlation with the perfect forms, existent for the majority of the verbs, but also due to other factors: the coming out of use of a large number of verbs. It should be taken into consideration the influence of the present theme over the participle (theme) one, for a form as frnt (lat. cl. fractus) has probably become franctus on the ground of the present frango. As a result, the participle cannot longer remain an independent formation, but it becomes a form dependent on the perfect and Present forms. Consequently, those two categories of the participles (strong and weak) had given different reflexes. The weak participle The passing process of the strong participles into the group of the weak ones hasnt ceased in the first written texts period. Thus, the participle of the verb a face appears both under the strong form faptu and the weak form fcut, modeled after the perfect. Regarding to the changes of the Latin weak participle, the forms underwent some general phonetic laws: after the fall of the final s and the reduction of the -u, new participial endings appeared after the conjugation: -at, -iat (for the verbs of the I conjugation: mutat, apropiat), -ut (for the verbs of II and III conjugation: czut, vndut). Gerund In the cause of evolution the Latin gerund underwent relatively few changes both in form and in use. 1) In classic Latin the gerund is presented as a system of the action name forms, derived from the imperfect theme with help of the nd suffix. Consequently, in the classic Latin the gerund formants were reduced to 3 elements: and, end, iend. 2) Ultimately the external analogy comes to being, that is a tendency to gave as few types of word change as possible as well as the internal tendency, that is the tendency to join the paradigmatic forms of the same word. Due to the desintegration of the case system a unique type of case was developed. At the same time the number of the formants of the gerund was reduced to 3, the same as in the classic Latin to 2: -andu for the I conj., and -endu for the rest. 3) On the oriental Romanic ground, the 2 Latin formants endo and ando gave birth to the reflexes nd ind as a result of the phonetic transformations.

15

The majority of the verbs of the Conjunctive I preserved the phonetic regular reflex of the Latin -ando (cantando > cntnd), except for the verbs ending in a after [j], where the - form -nd passed to i under the influence of the thematic vowel, so that the sound combination i + is not admitted by the language phonetic system. The verb of the Conj. IV with the gerund in endo preserved the regular reflex of this ending indo, except for the verbs ending in , which substitute ind with the nd due to the analogy with other forms of these verbs. The verbs of conj. II, III didnt keep the regular phonetic reflex of the gerund forms -ind (endo). A normal phonetic reflex is preserved for the verbs of conj. V that replaced the etymological ending with -ind. In the old texts, besides the gerunds in nd (u) forms in ndu (dndu, fcndu) are met representing an anterior faze of evolution in ando.

1. 4.The functions of the English gerund The syntactic functions of the verbals and those of the finite forms do not coincide and therein lies the main difference between them. The finite forms serve in the sentence only one syntactic function, namely, that of the finite predicate, the non-finite forms may perform a variety of functions. The most striking feature of the infinitive, gerund and participle one is that they have functions typical of different parts of speech. The development by which the gerund has aquired more and more of the syntactic characteristics of the verb has been very gradual and has been furthered by the formal identity of the gerund and the participle. Thus, having verb characteristics in most cases, the gerund comes into predicative connection, with other words, forming coordination or subordination. This chapter will be devoted to study of the syntactical functions in which the gerund may occur. The gerund, as well as other verbids, may be used in various syntactic functions. A single gerund occurs but seldom; in most cases we find a gerundial phrase or a gerundial construction. I. The gerund in the function of a subject usually expresses permanent or recurent actions, simultaneous with the action expressed by the predicate verb. E.g. "My darkening the light made her look up "(Dickens) Sentences with the gerund as subject have certain structural peculiarities:

16

1. We find the gerundial phrase as a subject only in declarative sentences. It is never used in interrogative sentences. 2. The gerund as a subject is always placed at the head of the sentence. It is never preceded by any secondary part of the sentence; 3. The gerund in the function of a subject is occasionally found in sentences beginning with " there is , but its use is restricted to negative sentences where it is usually preced by "no; E.g. "There was no pausing on the brink, no looking down or looking back/' (Dickens) It is rendered into Romanian by modul conjunctiv prezent. ,,N-am mat apucat so. md opresc pe marginea prdpastiei, nici sa ma uit inainte sau inapoi." When the subject of the sentence is a gerundial phrase, it is sometimes placed after the predicate. Then the sentence begins with the anticipatory "it". II. The gerund as predicative may express either state or identity In the second case the predicative of identity reveals the meanig of the object. Words derived from a verb system by means of the suffix ing may be used in a variety of meanings and functions, according to the context in which they occur. In the firs place, such words may be used as verbal nouns, i.e as nouns with a verbal meaning.

Reading and writing are now common acquirements; In addition to its verbal meaning, such a form in -ing may have verbal function: it may take an object or be qualified by an adverb. E.g.: I am fond of smoking a pipe. Nouns in -ing with called Gerunds. Note: In groups like: a human being, the Chrysler Building, the former being synonymous with house or edifice. Such nouns are not called Gerunds. The Gerund is the non-finite form of the verb, which like the Infinitive combines the properties of the verb with t hose of the noun. Similar to the Infinitive, the verbal meaning, or with verbal meaning and function combined, are

Gerund serves as the verbal name of a process, but its substantive quality is more strongly pronounced than that of the Infinitive. Namely as different from the Infinitive, and

similar to the noun, the Gerund can be modified by a noun in the possessive case or its

17

pronominal equivalents (expressing the subject of the verbal process), and it can be used with prepositions. Since the Gerund, like the Infinitive, is an abstract name of the process denoted by the verbal lexeme, a question might arise, why the Infinitive, and not the Gerund is taken as the head-form of the verbal lexeme as a whole, its accepted representative in the lexicon. As a neater of fact, the Gerund cannot perform the function of the paradigmatic verbal head-form for a number of reasons. In the first place, it is more detached from the finite verb than the Infinitive semantically, tending to be a far more substantively unit categorically. Then, as different from the Infinitive, it does not join in the Conjugation of the finite verb. Unlike the Infinitive, it is suffixal form, which makes it less generalized than the Infinitive in terms pf the formal properties of the verbal lexeme (although it is more abstract in the purely semantic sense). Finally it is less definite than the Infinitive from the lexico -grammatical point of view, being subject to easy neutralizations in its opposition with the verbal noun ining, as well as with the Present Participle. The general combinability of the Gerund, like that of the Infinitive, is dual, sharing some features with the verb, and some features with the noun. The verb- type combinability of the Gerund is displayed in its combining, first, with noun expressing the object of the action; third, with finite national verbs as the subject

of the action; fourth, with nouns as the prepositional adjunct of various functions. The Gerund, in the corresponding positional patterns, performs the functions of all the types of national sentence-parts, i.e. the subject, the object, the predicative, the attributive, the adverbial modifier. E.g. Repeating your accusations over and over again doesn't make them more convincing (Gerund subject position). No wonder he delayed breaking the news to Uncle Jim (Gerund direct object position). She could not give her wind to pressing wild flowers in Pauline's botany book. (Gerund addressee object position) Joe left annoyed at being shied by his roommates. (Gerund prepositional object position). You know what luck is? Luck is believing you're lucky. (Gerund predicative position). Fancy the pleasant prospect of listening to all the gossip they've in store for you. (Gerund attributive position)

18

 He could not push the furniture without bringing the whole lot down (Gerund adverbial of manner position). One of the specific Gerund patterns is its combination with the noun in the possessive case or its possessive pronominal equivalent expressing the subject of the action. This gerundial construction is used in cases when the subject of the gerundial process differs from the subject of the governing sentence-situation, i.e. when the gerundial sentence-part has its own, separate subject. E.g. 1. Powell's being rude like that was disgusting. The possessive with the Gerund displays one of the distinctive categorial properties of the Gerund as such, establishing it in the English lexemic system as the form of the verb with nominal characteristics As a matter of fact, from the point of view of the inner semantic relations, this combination is of a verbal type, while from the point of view of the formal a nominal type. It can be clearly demonstrated by the appropriate transformations,

i.e. verb-related and noun-related re-constructions. E.g.: I can't stand his criticizing artistic works that are beyond his competence. (T - verbal He is criticizing artistic works. T - nounal His criticism of artistic works.) Besides combining with the possessive noun-subject, the verbal -ing -form can also combine with the noun-subject in the common case or its objective pronominal equivalent. E.g.: I read in yesterday's paper about the hostages having been released This gerundial use as presenting very peculiar features of categorial mediality will be discussed after the treatment of the Participle: it is the suffix -ing added to its grammatically (categorially) leading element. Like the Infinitive, the Gerund is a categorially changeable (variable, demutative) form; it distinguishes the two grammatical categories, sharing them with the finite verb and the Present Participle, namely, the aspective category of retrospective coordination (perfect in opposition), and the category of voice (passive in opposition). Consequently, the categorial paradigm of the Gerund of the objective verb includes four forms: the simple active, the perfect active; the simple passive, the perfect passive. The Infinitive-Gerund correlation puts forward some points of structure and function worthy of special notice 19

Both forms are substance-processual, and the natural question that one has to ask about them is, whether the two do not repeat each other by their informative destination and employment. Observations of the actual uses of the Gerund and the Infinitive in texts do show the clearcut semantic difference between the forms, which consists m the Gerund being, on the one hand, of a more substantive nature than the Infinitive, i.e of a nature nearer to the thing nesssignification type; on the other hand, of a more abstract nature in the logical sense proper. Hence, the forms do not repeat, but complement each other, being both of them inalienable components of the English verbal system. The Gerund-Infinitive Correlation The consideration of the English verbids in their mutual comparison, supported and supplemented by comparing them with their non-verbal counterparts, puts forward some points of structure and functions worthy of special notice. [37, 153-154] In this connection, the gerund - infinitive correlation should be first brought under observation. One way to approach the distinction between gerunds and infinitives is in terms of the type of information generally presented in each form in their normal context of use. It is helpful to remember that infinitives and gerunds are both derived from verbs, but have syntactic functions normally associated with nouns. It is to be expected that they will be both verb-like and noun -like properties. By looking at how they are used, we can work out the extent to which each of them has more verb-like and noun-like like aspects, in terms of the information conveyed. Properties that are more verb-like involve actions and the performance of these actions, i.e. there is an assumption of an agent, or performer of the action. In contrast, the more noun-like properties involve events, and the treatment of those events as separate from their actual performance, almost as proposition. The event tends to be treated as a specific thing that can be referred to." Given these differences, it is possible to see that the gerund, like the infinitive, combines both verbal and nounal features, yet the gerund is more of a noun than the infinitive, which is explained by the fact that the gerund became part of the verb system much latter than the infinitive. In the case of gerund, the possibility of using a possessive form is one strong piece of evidence for its noun like status. Eg." She resented his going there without her.'"

20

We see that the definite sense of "the going there" conveys the implicated meanings of "actually happened" or "established activity" as the kind of infor-mation often associated with gerund complements. One final puzzle exists with regard to why we use the bare infinitive, and not the to infinitive, with sensory perception verbs. There seems to be a recurring pattern in English whereby LINGYISTIC DISTANCE reflects CONCEPTUAL DISTANCE.

1.4.1 The use of the Gerund 1 The Gerund is used: a) after prepositions, such as: after, before, by, for, from, on, etc. which

show relation of tense, cause, mod, purpose, etc. b) after prepositions; Noun with obligatory preposition: - doubt + about; - cause, reason + for; - belief, confidence, delight, experience, faith, interest, luck, pride + in; - charge, favor, habit, hope, intention, opportunity, point + of; - contribution, objection, opposition + to; etc. Adjectives and Past Participles with obligatory preposition angry, anxious, certain, enthusiastic, happy, optimistic, pleaded, sure. parts of speech which are followed obligatorily by certain

worried + about surprised + at; - excellent, famous, responsible, sorry, suitable, useful + for; - consistent, correct, diligent, experienced, expert, fortunate, helpful,interested, hate, prompt, quick, right, show, successful + in; afraid, ashamed, aware, capable, certain, conscious, convinced, fond, angry, astonished, bad, clever, delighted, expert, good, pleased, skilful,

guilty, proud, tired + of; - based, dependent, intent, keen + on; - accustomed, equal, equivalent, opposed, used + to; - annoyed, bored, content, delighted, furious, disappointed, happy, pleased , satisfied, sick, upset + with. 21

 Verbs with obligatory preposition: - to complain, dream, learn, worry + about; - to aim. hesitate + at; - to fight, struggle + against; - to begin, conclude, end + by; - to apologize, care + for; - to prevent, recover, refrain, retire + from; - to believe, consist, delight, participate, succeed + in, - to agree, concentrate, congratulate, count, decide, focus, insist, live ,rely + on; - to agree, contribute, book forward, object, resort + to; - to agree + with. c) after the noun "use" in expression: "it is no use" or "there is no use" and after adjective "worth": d) after transitive verbs: admit, avoid, consider, deny, detest, dislike, escape, fancy, finish, give up, cannot help, keep (on), don Y mind, miss ,postpone, practice, put off, resent, resist, risk, cannot stand, stop, suggest, etc. e) after the verbs which express a mental activity: to forget, remember,

understand, or feelings: cannot bear, dread, hate, like, love, neglect, prefer, regret, etc., alternately with the Infinitive 2 The gerund used in the function of an attribute. In this function it is preceded by a preposition. It always follows its head-nouns and is lexically dependent here. In most cases the gerund is preceded by the preposition "of. The attribute acquires appositive meaning here, i.e. it serves to explain the meaning of its head noun. That is why it can modify only certain abstract nouns that admit "of" and sometimes require an explanation of their meaning. E.g. suppose she had some momentary intention of committing an assault upon my aunt. (Dickens) "Presupun c s-a gndit o clip s se npusteasc asupra mtuii." 3 The gerund can be used as an adverbial modifier to a verb. In this function it denotes a second action accompanying the action expressed by the predicate verb. Owing to the variety of prepositions, which may precede the gerund in the funtion of an adverbial modifier, a gerund may have different meanings such as: time, manner, purpose,

22

attendant circumstances, condition, cause and concession. The gerund is not lexically dependent here, i.e. it may be used after any verb. (1) As an adverbial modifier of time it may characterize the predicate verb from the point of view of priority, simultaneity or posteriority. In this case, the prepositions use are "after", "on", "in", "before", "at". (2) As an adverbial modifier of manner, the gerund generally occurs with the prepositions "by", without" or "in ". In this function, the action denoted by the gerund expresses a means of performing the action of the predicate verb. It may also indicate the manner in which the action of the predicate verb is carried out. E.g. My aunt always excused any weakness of her own in my behalf, by transferring it in this way to my poor mother (Dickens) "Mtua obinuia s-i scuze slbiciunea pentru mine, atribuind-o bietei mele mame." (3) As an adverbial modifier of purpose the gerund is mainly used with the preposition "for ", but such cases are rarely found. E.g. "I did it for keeping her far away from me." (Dickens) "Am fcut-o ca s-o in departe de mine." It is rendered by infinitiv. (4) As an adverbial modifier of cause the gerund is introduced by the prepositions: "because of", "for", "for fear of", "on account of", "owing to", (5) As an adverbial modifier of condition the gerund is introduced by means of "without", "but for", "in case of". E.g. "1 could not go there without being invited." (Dickens) "Nu puteam s m duc acolo fr a fi invitat." (6) As an adverbial modifier of concession is preceded by the prepostions "in spite of", "instead of". It has a clear cut meaning here,owing to the preposition itself.Its position with regard to the predicate verb is not fixed. E.g. She saw me all enough; but instead of turning round and calling after me, ran away laughing." (Dickens) M-a vzut destul de bine, dar n loc s se ntoarc si s m cheme, a fugit rznd." Gerund has Verbal Characteristics: A Grammar category of Time and Voice Active Voice - Gerund: I enjoy learning English. - Perfect Gerund: He denies having taken the books. 23

Passive Voice: - Gerund: He can't stand being interrupted. - Perfect Gerund: The safe showed no signs of having been touched As a rule Gerund expresses an action. Simultaneous with the action of predicative verb (exception the situations when Gerund is preceded by prepositions: before or after) Perfect Gerund denotes a prior action to Predicative verb. This can be used instead of the Present form of the Gerund when we are referring to a past action. Perfect Gerund is used more rarely than Gerund and it especially appears after the verb "deny": With other verbs as: to remember, excuse, forgive, thank and after prepositions: on, after, without, the report of priority can be expressed also by the Gerund. Note: As usual passive sense of the Gerund is expressed by Passive form. But, to express Passive sense after verbs: want, need, require, deserve, and after adjective worth, it is used Active Gerund. Substantival characteristic Gerund may exhibit all the syntactic properties of a noun. Thus it may be preceded by an article, a possessive or demonstrative pronoun, a noun in the genitive, or an adjective, or followed by a noun-adjunct with of (or another preposition). Note: If a Transitive verb + its object is preceded by an article, Direct object will turn into prepositional Attribute with of: E.g: The strengthening of peace and security in Europe is an essential prerequisite for strengthening peace and security through the world.

1.4.2 THE GERUND AS SUBJECT 1. The function of the subject is, as a rule, performed by a simple Gerund. On the whole it is more or less neutral with regard to expressing time and aspect relations. However, the prevailing tendency is for it to express permanent and recurring actions, simultaneous with the action of the predicate verb. E.g."Not that I was active in the club, but being there seemed to bring me closer to people in general." "Nu pentru c activasem in club, dar fiind acolo pare sa ma fi aproppiat in general mai mult de oameni. "

24

Sometimes, though not often, a passive gerund is found, its time reference being the same as that of the active.

E.g."Being liked doesn't count so much in politics as outsiders think." "In politica nu prea conteaza daca te iubesc, dupa cum cred strainii." "Being born in my provincial town wasn't much different from being bom in Brooklyn." "E cam acelas lucru safii nascut in orasuul meu povencial ori in Brooklyn." The use of the perfect gerund as subject is a rare exception. It expresses the priority of the action of the gerund to that of the predicate verb. E.g."Having been bred in that communion was like being bom an Englishman." "Sa fii educat intr-o as cmunitate e ca si cum sa fii nascut englez." When the subject of the sentence is a gerundial phrase, it is the sometimes placed after the predicate. Then the sentence begins with the anticipatory it E.g. It is no use crying over spilt milk. [50, 23] The subject of the gerund may be expressed in different ways. It is generally indicated in the context and the relation of the action expressed by the gerund and its subject is easily established. The indication of the subject is often found in the same sentence and is expressed by one of the secondary parts. Occasionally it is expressed in one of the neighbouring sentences. E.g. Seeing you there, by the door, made me remember what I had to do. "Vazindute lnga usa mi-am amintit ce trebue sa fac." "Mrs. Eamshaw left him gasping. Being friends with her was going to be very exciting." "Mrs. Eamshaw 1-a lasat cu limba scoasa. E foarte emotiv sa fit prieten cu ea." The subject of the gerund may not be mentioned at all. In such cases the action is associated with any or every person or an indefinite number of unidentified persons. Lastly, the subject of the gerund may be expressed specially by using the so-called Complex gerund. The use of the gerund as subject is mainly found in literary English but even here it is not of frequent occurrence.

25

THE GERUND AS PREDICATIVE The usual link-verbs are to be and to mean. E.g. "The hard job was getting it done so you wouldn't know I was doing it." "Greu a fost sa scoti acest lucru la capat, deci n-ai fi stiut ca eu il facusem." "The important part is helping people so they can live normal lives." "Important e sa ajuti oamenii ca ei sa traiasca o viata mat buna" The gerund as a predicative is found more often when ' is preceded by like. It also has appositive meaning here, if the explanation is made by way of comparison. E.g. "I wondered how the hell I'd got myself mixed up in a project that couldn't be carried out. It was like starting to write a novel." "Ma mir, cum de naiba m-am implicat intr-un protect ce nu poate fi dus la capat, de parca ai ancepe sa scri un roman." Note: Notice that the subject of the sentence in the latter case often expressed by the personal pronoun it referring to a situation previously described. The gerund as a predicative may also be preceded some other compound prepositions. E.g. "She was by way of being a household tyrant." "De firea ei ea era un adevarat tiran in casa." We find the simple gerund in this function, which serves to express an action simultaneous with that of the predicate verb. The subject of the gerund either becomes clear from the context or it is any or every person or an indefinite number of unidentified persons (see the examples above). Sometimes, however, a complex gerund is used to indicate the subject of the gerund. E.g. "All right, dear. Go back to sleep. It was only me talking," "Totul e n regula, eu vorbeam scumpule, ntoarce-te in pat linistit."

GERUNDS AS PARENTHETIC In this function the gerund tends to become a set phrase and is generally placed at the head of the sentence. It is separated from the sentence by a comma. Gerunds as parenthetic expressions are not very frequent and usually denote some sort of reservation on the part of the speaker or else they are used as introductory phrases having the meaning of "incidentally". 26

GERUND AS PREDICATE The gerund may be used as the predicate in one-member sentences,interro-gative (a) and exclamatory (b). E.g. (a) "What about going to London?" "Ce zici, sa plecam la Londra? " (b) But letting him do it!" "Lasa-l sa faca aceasta!" This type of sentences is quite common in spoken English. Thus, we may draw the conclusion that the Romanian Gerunziulial constructions, as well as the English gerundial phrases and constructions, possess a great variety of functions which can express the slightest shades of meaning the sentence pretends to express.

1.4.3.Long Infinitive (with "to") and Gerund

The Long Infinitive and the Gerund has same nounal and verbal common characteristics, because they can: a) have: Subject: I want you to go first.

I can't stand Tom interrupting me all the time, Direct Object: I intend to read this tomorrow.

I remember spending a holiday with them. Adverbial Modifier: We wanted to go to the theatre.

He had the benefit of studying at a Romanian University. b) be the same functions in sentence: Subject, Predicative: To see her is to like her. Seeing is-believing. Direct Object: I have to swim in the sea. I love swimming. Prepositional Attribute: He has no desire to go.

He has no intention of going.

27

1.5. Participle I and its functions The traditional name Present Participle is open to the objection that the verbal form it denotes does not necessarily refer to the present just as "Past" Participle need to refer to the past. The alternatives, "imperfect" and "perfect" Participle, are prompted by consideration that a form like going usually expresses an incomplete action, a form like gone a completed one. But, as will be seen, participles in -ing do not always express incomplete actions, just as those in ed (or the corresponding irregular forms) do not always express completion. So long as no name has been invented that covers all the uses of these forms it is, perhaps, better not to discard the traditional terms. As a general rule, a Present Participle expresses an action or a state simultaneous with that expressed by the predicate of the sentence.

Verbal characteristics of the Participle I The Participle I has grammar categories of Tense and Voice. tense active Present Participle reading voice passive being read

Perfect Participle

having read

having been read

The Present Participle expresses a simultaneous action with the verb in Personal mood of sentence. E g. Running across the park, he heard somebody call his name The Perfect Participle is formed by Present Participle of the verb "have" and Past Participle of the conjugated verb. In sentence it expresses an action prior to the Predicative verb. E g. Having run across the park, he felt tire The perfect Participle and Past Participle are not similar verbal forms. Perfect Participle represents the perfect form of-ing Participle, which denotes a prior action to the action of the finite verb. E.g. Having finished the book, he went to bed. 28

Past Participle represents another verbal form which hasn't got the category of Tense and which denotes the action of result. E.g. The furniture mode in Romania is exported to many countries. Past Perfect is in the form's structure of Perfect Participle. E.g. Having mode a useful suggestion, he had our support. The Participle I is used to form the continuous aspect of verbs. E.g. I am speaking (Present Continuous). I have been speaking (Present Perfect Continuous). I was speaking (Past Continuous). I had been speaking (Past Perfect Continuous). I shall be speaking (Future Continuous). The -ing Participle can be used as Adjective. It is placed before the noun if its adjectival aspect and after the noun, if the verbal aspect is more obvious. E.g. 1. All sleeping children are beautiful, (sleeping = not awake) 2. The child sleeping in the next room is my baby brother, (sleeping = who is sleeping). In attributive use an English Present Participle usually corresponds to a Present Participle in other languages. The Present Participle can also be used after: to go, come, spend, -waste, be busy. shop: E.g. I'm going shopping this afternoon. spend /waste + an expression of time or money + Present Participle: Be busy + Present Participle. E.g. He is / was busy packing. The Present Participle can sometimes replace subject + verb in other main or subordinate clauses. A Present Participle phrase replacing a main clause When two actions by the some subject occur simultaneously it is usually possible to express one of them by a present participle. The Participle can be before or after the finite verb. The Present Participle can replace as/since/because + subject + verb. Note: being at the beginning of a sentence will normally mean "as he is/as he was. In cases like this the Participle must follow its noun/pronoun. Being fine the day, we decided is incorrect, but Being athletic, Tom found the climb quite easy is all right, as Tom is 29 go and come can be followed by the Participles of verbs of physical activity and the verb

the subject of both the participle and the following verb. It is possible to use two or more Participles, one after the other: The Perfect Participle emphasizes that the first action is complete before the second one starts, but is not normally necessary in combinations of this kind,ex- cept to confusion. Reading the instructions, he snatched up the fire extinguisher might give the impression that the two actions were simultaneous. The Present Participle may be used in construction after: - to have + Object - the basic verbs of sensation to see, feel, smell, and the verbs (to), The notice, and watch may Present can be be followed as by the be Object + Present with a to listen Participle Present predicative

construction The

denoted

Accusative regarded as

Participle.

Participle

may

adjunct to the subject of these verbs. In the corresponding construction with the plain Infinitive the action is not viewed as in progress, but merely referred to as such, either because the speaker or write considers its duration irrelevant, or because it actually occupies but a moment. The difference is one of what is sometimes called Aspect. The aspect expre-ssed by the Present Participle is called imperfective or durative: that expressed by the Infinitive in the corresponding construction is called perfective. Note: the occasional use of an Accusative with Present Participle after: to want, to like. The verbs that take an Accusative with Present Participle may also stand in the passive, a construction that may be denoted as Nominative with Present Participle. A Present Participle may follow the noun or pronoun it qualifies; in this case it is used in a semipredicative clause. The Present Participle is also used predicatively with a number of intransitive verbs denoting motion or the reverse: to come, go (out), be, sit, stand. After to go (out) the Present Participle does not, as after the other verbs, denote an action simultaneous with that of the finite verb.

A. The obligatory using of the Infinitive a) after the verbs: to arrange, ask, attempt, choose, decide, demand, etc agree, aim, consent, determine, hope, manage, etc. 30 +

b) after verbs, nouns and adjectives to express purpose' c) in the structure Accusative with Infinitive, after verbs which express a

order or request B. The obligatory using of the Gerund a) after transitive verbs: to admit, avoid, consider, denv, detect, dislike escape, fancy, finish, give up, cannot stand, slop, suggest, etc. b) after preposition: before, going out, switch off. c) after adjectives: worth, like and after "there is no":

The Infinitive with "to"

In some cases can be used as well as Gerund. Principal differences between these two forms are: a) the Gerund is used to express a general action, the Infinitive - to show an action fulfilled under different circumstances. b) the Gerund shows a prior action of a verb Personal mood. The Infinitive shows a future action. c) the Gerund shows a prior action, Infinitive shows goal of action expressed by a Predicative. d) the Gerund is used to express a deliberate action an involuntary action. The Infinitive to express

1.5.1.Lexico-Grammatical Properties of Participle I

The Present Participle is the non-finite form of the verb which combines the properties of the verb with those of the adjective and adverb, serving as the Present Participle is wholly homonymous with the Gerund, ending in the suffix -ing and distinguishing the same grammatical categories of retrospective coordination and voice. Like all the verbids, the Present Participle has no categorial time distinctions, and the attribute "present" in its conventional name is not immediately explanatory Still, both terms "Present Participle" and "Past Participle" are not alto-gether devoid of elucidative signification, if

31

not in the categorial sense, then in the derivational-etymological sense, and are none the worse in their quality then their doublet-substitutes "Participle I." and "Participle II." The Present Participle has its own place in the general paradigm of the verb, different from that of the Past Participle, being distinguished by the corresponding set of characterization features. Since it possesses same traits both of adjective and adverb, the Present Participle is not only dual, but also triple by its lexico-grammatical properties, which is displayed in its combinability as well as in its syntactic functions. The verb-type combinability of the Present Participle is revealed: 1. in its being combined, in various uses, with noun expressing the

object of the action; 2. with nouns expressing the subject of the action (in semi-predicative complexes); 3. with modifying adverbs; 4. with auxiliary finite verbs (word-morphemes) in the analytical forms of the verb.

1.6. THE FUNCTIONS OF THE ROMANIAN GERUNZIUL

As it was said already that the verb-characteristics of the Romanian Gerunziul prevails, it has the ability to form predicate relations with other words. We are to speak of 1. Coordinated predicate relations 2. Subordinate predicate relations of the gerund In the case the Romanian Gerunziul occurs in coordinative correlation with the subject, it forms compound sentences, where the clauses may be connected - Syntactically ,i.e. by means of coordinating conjunctions. Asyndetically, i.e. without a conjunction. The correlative character of the Romanian Gerunzial construction is more evident when its own subject modifies it. The gerund may be used in various syntactic functions in the case it forms subordinate correlation with the predicate-verb of the main clause a single gerund occurs but seldom, in most cases we find a gerundial construction (construct gerunziala). I. O propozitie secundara complimentara. II The gerundial construction as propozitie secundara atributiv-predicativa 32 -

III The gerundial construction in the function of propozitie seundara temporala. The gerund in this function is apt to express simultaneity and priority, i.e.: (a) the gerund expresses that the action denoted by the gerund is simultaneous with the action of the finite form of the verb in the sentence. (b) the gerund is also often used in this function to indicate an action prior to the action of the predicate-verb. The verb character of the gerund in the function of propozitie secundara de timp is often confirmed by the existence of two subjects: the subject of the predicate-verb and that of the gerund. The gerundial construction in the function of propozitie secundara cauzala. The gerundial construction in the function of propozitie secundara The gerundial construction in the function of propozitie secundara conditionala It is to be mentioned that the Romanian Gerunziul can occur in two or more functions at once The function of propozitie secundara atributiva and temporala as propozitie secundara atributiva, temporala and cauzala. The Romanian "gerunziu", is the verb forms in - and (-ind), is not the equivalent of the English gerund but rather of the participle (present or perfect). Only in few cases do the Romanian forms in and (-ind) correspond to English words in -ing. To sum up, we may conclude that the Romanian Gerunzial constructions, as well as the English gerundial phrases and constructions, possess a great variety of functions which are intended to express various shades of meaning in the sentence. The means by which the English gerund is rendered into Romanian and vice-versa are rendered in the tables bellow: Table I Gerund and Gerundial phrases English (1) subject Romanian Modul conjunct! v prezent Infmitiv Supin Constructie gerunziala. (2) predicate Infinitiv Substantiv verbal Modul conjunctiv

prezent (3) part of a compound verbal predicate (a) Modul conjunctiv prezent part of a compound verbal modal predicate (b) part of a compound verbal aspect predicate Modul conjunctiv prezent Modul indicativ imperfect 33

(4) object (a) direct object (b) prepositional indirect object (5) attribute Modul conjunctiv prezent Modul indicativ perfectui compus Supin Modul conjunctiv prezent Infinitiv Gerunziu Modul indicativ mai mult ca perfectui Modul conjunctiv prezent Infinitiv Substantiv verbal (6) adverbial modifier (a) of time Propozitie secundara de timp Infinitiv

1.6.1. The Characteristics of the Romanian Gerunziul The Romanian Gerunziul is a non-finite form of the verb. There is no such a distinction between the suffixes of the gerund in English; the "ing" from is unique for all the verbs; The Romanian Gerunziul has negative forms: Eg. Neterminnd, nestudiind, neveghind, neputnd, nefacnd etc. But also: Nemaiterminnd, nemaistudiind, nemaiveghind. The personal and reflexive pronouns in D/A, connected to the gerund by means of the vowel ,,-u", confer it ,,personal value". E.g. with personal pronouns: telefonndu-mi (V+D) asteptindu-ma (V+A) with reflexive pronouns: amintindu-mi(D) spalndu-ma(A). [42, 247] I was analyzing the English gerund from the point of view of categories; let's see what we can find in Romanian. The Romanian Gerunziul is never used independently and actually signifies an action in progress. This feature makes gerund special among the other non-finite forms of the verb (infinity, participiu and supin).

34

It became a tradition to treat the gerund as an adverbial modifier of manner, but preserving its syntactical characteristics of a noun it assumed to a greater extent the dynamic force of a verb. The Romanian Gerunziul has verb, adverb, adjective and noun characteristics, the latter being very rarely demonstrated. As the verb-characteristics prevail, the gerund has the ability to form predicate relations with other words, namely, coordinated predicate relations and subordonatedpredicate relations. Another peculiar thing that shold be mentioned about the Romanian Gerunziul is its "predicativity" , i.e. its dependence on the predicate verb. The Romanian Gerunziul has no the category of tense. Some grammarians use the term "temporality", while referring to its verbal characteristics. [52, 21] But what temporality is ? It is a functional - semantic category which includes various means of language used to express tense relationships. In addition the gerund can also express voice: 1. diateza activa - mergind, facind 2. diateza pasiva - fiind vazut 3. diateza reflexiva - uitindu-se [34, 39] [16, 26] The Romanian Gerunziul may asociated with any tense of the predicate verb, expressing (a) simultaneity, (b) anteriority and (c) posteriority. Thus, the Romanian Gerunziul is a non-finite form of the verb, which possesses predicative and non-predicative properties, both being typical of the gerund with its verb characteristics, but it has other three characteristics inherent only of non-predicative properties. Most grammarians support such views. Besides verb -characteristics the gerund has adverb ,adjective and noun characteristics.. The adverb characteristics of the gerund show the manner in which the action of the predicate verb is performed. The adjective - characteristics of the gerund are quite different from those mentioned above. The gerund, as well as the adjectives is descendant of the intransitive verb, and, as a rule, a gerund like this agrees with the noun in gender [40, 479] The noun - characteristics of the gerund are rarely demonstrated. Still, such examples may be found in the Romanian literature: E.g. "Murindului speranta, turbarii rdzbunarea" (Eminescu) "Pe prispa casei se vedeau bolnavi si murinzi [34, 73] [52, 36]

35

The table above shows the characteristics of the gerund English and Romanian from the point of view of its grammatical categories. Now I am to render the means by which the English gerund is translated into Romanian:

Passive voice

substantiv verbal modul conjunctiv prezent supin participiu

The gerund modified by: (a) an adverb (b) an object

(a) modul conjunctiv prezent (b) modul conjunctiv prezent (c) infinitiv

Noun - characteristics Subject infinitiv substantiv gerunziul/constructie gerunziala Direct object Prepositional object (indirect) modul conjunctiv prezent Translations vary: modul conjunctiv

prezent modul indicativ mai mult ca perfectui, Attribute Adverbial modifier Predicative viitorul I etc modul conjunctiv prezent infinitiv gerunziul substantiv verbal modul conjunctivprezent

1.7 The Differentiation between Gerund and Present Participle So far we have spoken of the ing forms as of two different sets of homonymous forms: the gerund (with its distinctions of correlation and voice) and the participle (with its distinctions of correlation and voice). As there is no external difference between the two sets, the question may arise whether it could not be supposed that there is only one set of forms, which in different contexts acquire different shades of meaning and perform different syntactical functions. Such a view was indeed put forward by the Dutch scholar E.Kruisinga . 36

On the contrary, A.I. Smirnitsky insists on keeping both terms on the ground that their combinability is quite different i.e one range of uses is definitely noun related, while the other range of uses is definitely adjective-adverb related. It is a peculiar feature of this 'ing' -problem that in some contexts the two 'ings' come very close together and additional factors are required to draw a distinction between them .The two "ings" coincide in such sentences as: E.g."He was afraid of her knowing: the truth''\ where the 'ing' is a gerund if 'her' is a personal pronoun in the objective case; also in the sentence "He was glad at John's coming " the "ing" is a gerund, but if John's is replaced by John, the 'ing' seems to be a participle, though this is not acknowledged by all scholars. The use of the 'ing' presented above is known in linguistics as "half -gerund". So, in terms of the general 'ing'- form problem, one has to choose between the two possible interpretations pf the half-gerund: either as an actually intermediary form with double features, whose linguistic semistatus is truly reflected in its conventional name, or as an element of a non-existent categorical specification, i.e. just another variant of the same indiscriminate V- ing. In this connection, the reasoning of those who support the idea of the integral V-ing can be roughly presented thus: if the two uses of V-ing are functionally identical, and if the "half - gerund" V - ing, occurs with approximately the same frequency as the "full - gerund" V - ing, both forms presenting an ordinary feature of an ordinary English text, then there is no point in discrimininating the "participle" -ing and the "gerund" - ing. [35, 55] [55, 273] In treating the so-called "half- gerund" issue the Russian scholar L. Iofik presents such complexes as being common : a) with nouns that have no case opposemes: E.g."The back-benchers insisted on the treaty being ratified" b) with nouns accompanied by attributes in post- position: E.g."Fancy a woman of taste buying a hat like that" c) to avoid ambiguity which might arise in oral speech if the gerunds were connected with a noun in the possessive case: E.g."I imagine his son (son's) marrying so young ". d) when the gerund is preceded by more than one noun: E.g."She objected to children and women smoking ". e) when it is desirable to stress the person component of this complex: E.g."I hate the idea of you wasting your time ".

37

Though there is no unity of opinion about the nature of such forms, the Russian scholar does not think it expedient to have a special name for them. Examples like those given above merely show that the subject words of the gerund may also be nouns (pronouns) in the common case (or nouns and pronouns having no case opposites) and pronouns in the objectives case. The use of the common or the objectives case form to express the agent of the action denoted by the gerund makes it possible to use gerundial complexes with much greater number of nouns and pronouns. The comparative evaluations of the actually different uses of the ing-forms cannot fail to show their distinct categorial differentiation, which may be easily illustrated by specialized gerund testing and participle-testing, as well as by careful textual observations of the forms. [57, 219] [7, 182]

1) The gerund - testing includes the noun - substitution procedure backed by the questionprocedure: E.g. He insisted on giving me his pillow. What did he insist on? -He insisted on my acceptance of the pillow. The other no less convincing evidence of the nounal featuring of the gerund is its natural occurrence in coordinative connections with the noun: E.g. What he does need is relaxation and simply cheering a bit.... 2) The participle - testing includes the adjective - adverb substitution procedure backed by the corresponding question - procedure: E.g. He ran past the door, whistling hideously. How did he run past the door? - He ran hurriedly past the door. (adverb - substitution procedure). Thus, we may conclude that the difference between the gerund and the participle is basically this. The Gerund, along with its verbal qualities, has substantival qualities as well; the Participle, along with its verbal qualities, has adjectival qualities. This of course brings about a corresponding difference in their syntactical functions: the Gerund may be the subject or the object in a sentence, and only rarely an attribute, whereas the Participle is an attribute first and foremost. We should also bear in mind that in certain contexts the opposition between the gerund and participle is neutralized. Given these peculiarities we may conclude that the "ing" - form problem is a very difficult one. The solution largely depends on what view we take of the unity of a grammatical form and on the extent to which we are prepared to allow for shades of meaning in one form. (or set of forms). If we admit any amount of variety rather than admit the existence of grammatical homonyms, we shall formulate a theory of the mutual relations between the varies shades of 38

meaning that the form can have. If, on the other hand, we admit homonymy rather than unity of the form disintegrate, as it were, in a variety of shades, we shall be justified in keeping to the traditional view which distinguishes between gerund and participle as between two different, though homonymous, sets of grammatical forms. Since up to now it has not been possible to find a convincing, invariable meaning to cover both Participle and Gerund. That is why in treating the ing- form we shall have to formulate its meaning and its functions in such a way as to allow for all the cases of the 'ing' - forms to be included.

1.7.1. Identification of the Gerund-Participle I. Correlation in their reference to each other The consideration of the English verbids in their mutual comparison, supported and supplemented by comparing them with their non-verbal counterparts, puts forward some points of structure and function worthy of special notice. Within the Gerund-Participle correlation, the central point of our analysis will be the very lexico-grammatical identification of the two-verbid forms in -ing in their reference to each other. Do they constitute two different verbids, or do they present one and the same form with a somewhat broader range of functions than either of the two taken separately? The ground for raising this problem is quite substantial, since the outer structure of the two elements of the verbal system is absolutely identical: they are outwardly the same when viewed in isolation. It is not by chance that in the American linguistic tradition which can be traced back to the school of Descriptive Linguistic the two forms are recognized as the one integral V-ing. In treating the -ing-forms as constituting one integral verbid entity, opposed, on the one hand, to the Infinitive (V-to), on the other hand, to the Past Participle (V-en), appeal is naturally made to the alternating use of the possessive and the common-objective nounal element in the role of the subject of the ing-form (mostly observed in various object positions of the sentence). This use presents a case known in linguistics as "half-Gerund". So, in the terms of the general ingform problem, we have to choose between the two possible interpretations of the half-Gerund: either as an actually intermediary form with double features, whose linguistic semi status is truly reflected in its conventional name, or as an element of a non-existent categorial specification, i.e. just another variant of the same indiscriminate V-ing. In this connection, the reasoning of those who support the idea of the integral V-ing form can roughly be functionally identical, and if the "half-Gerund" V-ing occurs with approximately the same frequency as the "full-Gerund" V-ing, both forms presenting an ordinary feature of an

39

ordinary English text, then there is no point in discriminating the "Participle" V-ing and the "Gerund" V-ing. In compliance with the general principle of approach to any set of elements forming a categorial or functional continuum, let us consider the correlation between the polar elements of the continuum, i.e. the correlation between the pure Present Participle and the pure Gerund, setting aside the half-Gerund for a further discussion. The comparative evaluation of the actually different uses of the ing -forms can't flail to show their distinct categorial differentiation: one range of uses is definitely noun-related, definitely of process-

substance signification; the other range of uses is definitely adjective-adverb related, definitely

of process-quality signification. This differentiation can easily by illustrated by specialized Gerund-testing and Participle testing, as well as by careful textual observations of the forms. The Gerund-testing, partly employed while giving a general outline of the Gerund, includes the noun-substitution procedure backed by the question procedure. The Participle also enters into easy coordinative and parallel associations with qualitative and stative adjectives. Very important in this respect will be analogies and the Past Participle qualitative function, since the separate categorial study of the Past Participle remains unchallenged. Of especial significance for the differential verbid identification purposes are the two different types of conversion the compared forms are subject to, namely, the nounal conversion of the Gerund and, correspondingly, the adjectival conversion of the Participle. Having recourse to the evidence of the analog type, as a counter-thesis against the evidence of the analog type, as a counter-thesis against the attempted demonstration, one might point out cases of categorial ambiguity, where the category of the qualifying element remains open to either interpretation such as the "typing instructor", the "boiling kettle", or the like. However, cases like these present a trivial homonymy which, being resolved, can itself be taken as evidence in favor of, not against, the two ing -forms differing from each other on the categorial lines. These complexes of descriptive and narrative stylistic nature seem to be gaining ground in present-day English.

40

CHAPTER II. Various Modalities of Translating Participle I and Gerund from English into Romanian

2.1.1 The Ways of Interpreting Participle I from English into Romanian

This contrastive study mainly is based on English literary works and their translation into Romanian. Maugham W.S. Catalina The moon and Sixpence Christie A. The mystery of the blue train a) Mod Indicativ trecut Perfectul Simplu E: - The Colonel, still standing in front of the fireplace R: Colonelul sta nemicat n faa cminului ... E: Miss Waterford was giving a tea party... R: Domnioara Waterford invitase la ceai ... (Maugham W.S. The moon and Six pence p.45-46) In Romanian the Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as: Verb with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu. Mod Indicativ trecut Perfect Compus E: - I ve been telephoning Major Knighton all day ... R: Toat ziua am telefonat maiorului Knighton . (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue train p.20) E: But, I wasnt dreaming R: Dar, n-au visat. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.61) In this cases the English Participle I is also rendered into Romanian by Predicat verbal simplu. E: - Now the war has come bringing with, it a new attitude. R: A trecut peste noi rzboiul i a adus o nou concepie despre via. (Maugham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.74) Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of Manner is translated as Verb with function of Direct Object and Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu.

41

Mod Indicativ trecut Imperfect E: elegant figure was progressing along at a leisurely pace. R: elegant pea agale, n lungul strzii. E- She had taken the stones from the case and was holding them against R: Luase pietrele din cutie i le inea pe decolteu. E: - A representative of the law was making notes in a packet-book. R: Un reprezentant al legii i nota ceva ntr-un carnet. E: Soon the convert was buzzing with excitement. R: Curnd ntreaga instituie zumzia de agitaie. E: Charles Strickland was living. R: unde locuia Strickland E: and Mrs Strickland was sitting with her back to the light. R: iar doamna Strickland edea cu spatele spre lumin . E: and he was using every precaution R: se folosea de orice precauie E: ... when he was asking one of his relatives for a subscription R: cnd cerea uneia dintre rudele sale o subscripie E: She was weeping freely R: Acum plngea fr a mai ncerca s se mai ascund E: he power that was struggling within him. . . . R: ... n sufletul su se zbtea o rorta . The English Participle I with function of Predicate is translated into Romanian as: Verb with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu in all previous cases. E: - Mrs Strickland was taking her family to the coast of Norfolk... R: Doamna Strickland plnuia s plece cu familia pe litoralul comitatului Norfolk In this sentence the Participle I is rendered by Predicat verbal compus. E: she had been making her final purchases before leaving London. R: i fcea ultimele cumprturi nainte de a prsi oraul. Here, the Participele I with function of Predicate is translated into Romanian by Infinitiv. E: - He was thinking of the series of women ... R: Se gndea la femeile ... 42 her breast.

E: I was thinking of Ruth. R: M gndeam la Ruth. (Christie A. The mystery of the blue train p.27, 29) In both cases the Participle I with function of Predicate is rendered as Verb with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu. E: ... The Bishop with his attending friars retired to the Dominican convent. R: ... episcopul mpreun cu clugrii ce-l nsoeau se retrase la mnstirea Dominican. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.33) Participle I with function of Attribute is translated as Verb with functions of Attribute and Direct Object. In this case we have the Romanian Predicat verbal simplu. a) Mod Indicativ. Viitor Forma I

E: - She wrote to tell on which day she was arriving in London R: ... i-am scris s-i anune ziua cnd vor sosi la Londra. (Maugham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.47) The English Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as Verb with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu. b) Mod Indicativ Prezent

E: It is always distressing R: M ntristeaz ntotdeauna. E: The time was approaching when the marriage of Beatriz might take place R: Se apropie vremea cnd s-ar fi putut ncheia cstoria 1ui Beatriz. E: He's been drawing in his horns for the last year. R : De un an tot lichideaz partea lui. E: "What is Mrs. Strickland going to do?" R: ,,i doamna ce are de gnd s fac E: - We' are all waiting for him R: Cu toii l ateptm E: - ,,Are people talking about it?" R; -Se vorbete mult despre aceasta n ora? In all this cases we find that the English Participle I with function of Predicate is rendered into Romanian as Verb with function of Predicate and also has the equivalent of Predicat verbal simplu. E: I am willing to excuse a thousand faults. 43

R: Snt dispus s iert o mie de greeli. But, in this sentence the Romanian equivalent from the syntactic point of view is Predicat nominal. E: You might have thought that he was controlling his anger only by an effort of will R : Ai fi zis c numai cu un efort de voin i stpnete furia In this case we have Participle I with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu. E: to see how she was taking it. R: . de a vedea cum se comport n aceast situaie. E: when they thought no one was looking. R: ... n momentul cnd i nchipuiau c nu le observ nimeni. E: I was not carrying out my embassy R: Simeam c nu-mi indeplinesc misiunea. In Romanian the Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as Verb with function of Direct Object and also, we find here Predicat verbal simplu. E: She had no notion of the risks she was incurring. R : Ea nu-i ddea seama de riscurile pe care le atrage . E: a woman who had evidently been awaiting his arrival. R : o femeie care era clar ca l ateapt. Here the Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as Verb with function of Attribute. E: - It reminds you of a placid rivulet, meandering smoothly trough green pastures. R: i aminteti de ruleul ce curge linitit prin E: they are like poor wantons attempting with pencil R: biei desfrnai care ncearc cu ajutorul creionului de sprncene ... Participle I with function of Attribute is translated into Romanian as Verb with function of Attribute and Direct Object. We find here also Predicat verbal simplu. E: - Mr. Goby is below sir, waiting to see you. R: Domnul Goby e jos, domnule, ateapt s v vad. (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue trainp.26) E: - You are dreading the publicity? R : i-e team de publicitate? E: -If youre walking up Victoria Street ... R: Dac o ei pe strada Victoria... 44

(Mangham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.70, p.29) In this three cases the Participle I with function of Predicate is rendered by Verb with function of Predicate i.e. Predicat verbal simplu. c) Modul Infinitiv.

E: ... many of them, while not neglecting then duties. R: ... multe din ele fr a-i neglija ndatoririle. (Mangham W.S. The moon and Six pence p.49) The Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of time is translated as Verb with function of subordinate Attribute Clause. d) Mod Condiional trecut.

E: ... as though someone was lying dead . R: ... ca i cum n camera de alturi s-ar fi aflat un mort. (Mangham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.59) In Romanian the Participle I with function of Predicate is rendered as Verb with function of Predicate. f) Modul Conjunctiv Prezent. E: - How are we going to live? R: -Din ce-o s mai trieti? (Mangham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.46) The English Participle I with function of Predicate is rendered into Romanian as Verb with function of Predicat. g) Mod Imperativ Negativ Interogativ E: - Arent you taking an aveful chance? R: - Nu riscai prea mult? (Mangham W.S. The moon and Sixpence P.53) The same function we find in this sentence i.e. Participle I with function of Predicate in the Romanian sentence has the same function: of Predicat verbal simplu. h) Substantiv+Prepoziie. E: ... but when that was proposed to Beatriz she was seized with shrieking hysterics ... R: ... dar cnd i se fcu aceast propunere lui Beatriz, o apucaser nite istericale cu ipete ... (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.32) Participle I with function of Attribute is translated as: Noun ,with function of Attribute. In this case the Noun ipete is introduced by Preposition cu . 45

E: ... and permitted a depreciating smile to pass over his face. R: ... i permise ca un zmbet de dezaprobare s i traverseze faa. (Mangham W.S. The moon and Sixpence p.61) In this sentence the Noun dezaprobare is used with Prepsition de in order to emphasize the manner. E: She had a flat in Westminster, overlooking the unfinished cathedral. R: Avea un apartament n cartierul Westminster, cu vederea spre catedr pe atunci neterminat nc. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.46) Like in the first case, we have the Noun vederea and the same Preposition cu. Thus, we may conclude that Participle I with function of Attribute is rendered into Romanian as Noun with function of Attribute i.e. Atribut substantival in all three cases. i) Substantiv. E: It was pleasing to Don Juan to think that the grandeur of the reception arraunged for them .. R: Era o ncntare pentru Don Juan s poat vedea c grandoarea misterioas a primirii lor . (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.29) In this sentence the Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as Noun i.e. Predicat nominal. j) Gerunziu. Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of Manner is rendered as Gerund, Gerundial Construction and Noun as: Adverbial Modifier of Manner and of Reason. E: Who knew but what, if he played his cards well cultivating the right people, he might in the und rise to great heights? R: Cine tie dac nu jucndu-i bine crile i cultivndu-i bine pe oamenii cei mai sus pui n ar fi putut pn la urm s se ridice la ranguri foarte nalte. In this case the English Participle I is rendered by Gerund, but from the Syntactic point of view is rendered by Complement Circumstantial de Mod. E: dining at one smart restaurant after another. R:lund masa la cele mai elegante restaurante. E: but the Bishop, to admiration of the onlookers, prevented her and talking her in his arms kissed her in both cheeks. R: doar spre admiraia privitorilor, episcopul o mpiedic i lund-o n brae o srut pe amndoi obraji. 46

The English Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of Manner is translated as Gerund or syntactically - Predicat verbal simplu. E: trying politely to show interest in the conversation R: cutnd n mod politicos s manifeste interes pentru conversaia celorlali . E: and fearing that the child was going into a decline R: temndu-se c nu cumva copila s se mbolnveasc ru E: comparing the generosity of one R: . . . comparnd generozitile unuia E: when she used to go to parties in sage green, holding a daffodil R: cnd se ducea la petreceri n rochie cumini de culoare verde, innd n mn o narcis. Here, we have the same case i.e. Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of Manner and the same translation Gerund as Adverbial Modifier of Manner, like previous examples. E: said V.A. patting her shoulder. R: spuse V.A. btnd-o pe umr. E: I was glad that, catching sight of the clock at the Army and Navy stores R: Am fost bucuros cnd, privind la ceasornicul magazinului ,,Army and Navy" (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.40, p.31, p.18) In this two sentences the Participle I as Adverbial Modifier of Manner is translated as Gerund but, also as Noun i.e. Predicat verbal simplu from the syntactical point of view. k) Participiu adjectival. E: ... to talk about the extending day... R: ... pentru a discuta despre ziua aceea plin de emoii ... E: It was a small chamber containing nothing but a bed. R: - Era o cmru cam goal, mobilat doar cu un pat ... Participle I with function of Attribute is rendered as Adjective i.e. Participiu adjectival in all cases. E: ... a billowing red eiderdown. R: ... o pilot roie aruncat negligent. E: The inhabitants, wearing their best clothes, were up by down. R: Locuitorii mbrcai srbtorete, erau n agitaie nc din zori. E: and the son's well - meaning efforts threw a singular chill upon the father's admires. R: Astfel nct eforturile bine intenionate ale fiului provoac o ciudat rceal n rndurile admiratorilor tatlui. 47

In this sentences Participle I with function of Attribute is translated as Participle i.e. Participiu adjectival. E: I have a recollection of large, unbending women R: mi-au rmas n minte cteva figuri de femei inepate E: by reason of those two upstanding, pleasant children so. R : s fie transmis i generaiilor viitoare prin aceti doi copii dragui i bine crescui E: so that you have little but a pleasing piece of color. R: i nu-i mai ngduie s deslueti dect un clorit plcut. E: The women were too nice to be well dressed, and too sure of their position to be amusing. R : Femeile erau prea serioase ca s fie mbrcate cu gust i prea ptrunse de rangul lor pentru a fi amuzate. (Maugham W.S. The moon and SixPence p.49; p.25; p.51)

Participiu verbal. E: Shes raving about your book R: - e entuziasmat de cartea dumitale. E: ... Who is willing to listen. R: ... oricine e dispus s le asculte (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.80, p.17) In Romanian the Participle I with function of Predicate is translated as Participle or as Predicat nominal from the syntactical point of view. l) Adjectiv E: - He has a charming character. R: ... are i un caracter admirabil E: ... with dark flashing eyes ... R: ... cu ochii ntunecai i scnteietori... Participle I with function of Attribute is rendered as Adjective or Atribut adjectival, and the meaning is unchanged. E: He was very cunning. R: Era foarte viclean. E: But her voice was unconvincing. R: Dar glasul su era neconvingtor. 48

In this cases we find that the Participle I with function of Attribute is also translated as Adjective but from the syntactic point of view is rendered by Predicat nominal. E: the procession was formed and the cavalcade made an imposing entry into the city. R: alaiul se forma n cele din urm i cavalcada i fcu o intrare impozant n ora. E: It seizes with avidity upon any incidents, surprising or mysterious. R: Oamenii se repd cu aviditate asupra oricror incidente mai neobinuite sau mai tainice. In the Romanian sentences the Participle I is also translated as Adjective but from the syntactic point of view as Atribut adjectival. E: Rose Waterford had a blistering tongue. R: Rose Waterford avea o limb usturtoare. E: it is charming faculty . . . R: o calitate fermectoare. . . E: and could have passed anywhere for the managing clerks of a city firm. R: i puteau s treac oriunde drept funcionari superiori ai unei firme din,,City". This case is different from the previous because the Participle I with function of Attribute is rendered here by Adjectiv substantival. E: I used to listen with astonishment to the stinging humor R: i ct de mult m uimea umorul caustic In this sentence Participle I with function of Attribute is translated as Adjective. The word sting is translated indirectly i.e. in a metaphoric way caustic. E: no one could do more charming ones. R: nimeni nu putea s aib gesturi mai ncnttoare. The same function of Attribute has the Participle I in this case and it is also rendered as Adjective with the comparative degree of superiority mai incintatoare. E: I made up my mind to see Strickland the following evening R: M-am decis s-1 vizitez pe Strickland n seara urmtoare The Participle following determine the Noun evening which in the sentence has the function of Direct Object. E: his eyes kept that mocking smile. R: ochii lui pstrau acea sclipire batjocoritoare. In this sentence Participle I with function of Attribute is translated as Adjective. But, it is also translated in metaphoric way using a personification. E: It was separated by a double archway with a supporting column into two parts 49

R : Desprit n dou printr-o arcad dubl cu o coloan de sprijin This case is different from the previous because the Participle I with function of Attribute is rendered here by Adjectiv substantival. E: She, whose gaiety, charming willfulness R: Ea, a crei veselie, ale crei capricii ncnttoare We have observed that the Participle which in English sentence stays before the Noun with function of Direct Object, in the Romanian is found after Direct Object.ncnttoare is an Adjective with positive degree. E: and I thought it disgusting that a man R: i mi prea dezgusttor ca un om E: And again that strange transforming smile stole over his face. R: i din nou zmbetul acela ciudat i transfigura faa. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.3; p.29; p.17) The English Participle is translated indirectly by an Adjective having the positive degree i.e. the meaning English sentence is more evident but in Romanian is decreased. In Romanian there is no verbal grammatical form Participle I as such. It has historicallz been substituted by Gerunziul. The Participle existing in Romanian corresponds to the English grammatical form Part II. Present Participle can replace a relative Pronoun plus verb, thus making the utterance more concise, whereas in Romanian the Present Participle is translated by means of a relative pronoun plus verb, this being best possible alternative. Analysing the mentioned examples we may do the following conclusions. Participle Present in most cases is rendered into Romanian by anAdjective; Verb-mood Indicativ trecut. Imperfect. Indicativ trecut. Perfect simplu. Indicativ trecut.

Perfect compus. Indicativ Prezent; as Gerund and Participiu adjectival, Participiu verbal.

2.1.2. The ways of Interpreting Gerund from English into Romanian

The ways, with the help of which the constructions and Phrases are translated into Romanian language are: a) Modul Indicativ. Prezent E: ...His partner ... had taunted him with hinding his where about... R: ... asociatul lui ... l acuz c se ascunde... (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.58) 50

In this cases the Gerund hindingis translated by a Verb in Indicative mood se ascunde, this Verb expresses a reflexive action. The English Gerund is preceded by verbal Predicate taunted which is used in past tense and is joined by the conjuction with. The Gerund hinding is lexically dependent and the action expressed by it passed in the Past Perfect like the main Predicate. E: - Theres something troubling you... R: Exist ceva ce te nelinitete (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.23) The English Gerund troubling functions as Attribute and it is translated into Romanian by a Verb in the Indicative mood. As a rule the Attribute determines a Noun, in this case something is the Noun which functions in the sentence as Direct Object and it is also abstract Noun. E: - When we had done discussing the merits of the latest book. R: Dup ce terminm discuiile asupra meritelor ulltimei cri aprute. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.31) In this sentence discussing expresses a Past Continuous action, it is translated into Romanian by a Predicat verbal compus being composed of a Verb in the Indicative Mood plus Noun which function as a compound part of the Adverbial Modifier of Time. b) Modul Indicativ trecut - Perfectul simplu E: - As they passed through the gate the church bells were set ringing. R: Cnd trecur pe poart pornir a suna clopotele bisericilor. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.12) In this case the Gerund function as Indirect Object, it is translated as Predicat verbal compus pornira a suna. E: ... And after reviewing various possible candidates... R: ... i dup ce trecu n revist mai muli posibili candidai... (Maugham W.S. The moon and Six Pence p.66) The Gerund is translated as Verb functions as Adverbial Modifier of Time; it is also expresed by Predicat verbal simplu in the Romanian example. Modul Indicativ trecut Perfect compus E: I cannot blame him for taking step, which was forced upon him by circumstances. R: Nu-l pot ine de ru pentru c a fcut un pas la care a fost silit de mprejurri. (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.67) 51

The Gerund is rendered into Romanian by Predicat verbal simplu c a fcut Modul Indicativ trecut Imperfect E: I never ceased to be fascinated by then persistence in eating buttered toast. R: M fascina ncpinarea cu care i mncau tartinele. (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.54) Here, the Gerund functions as Indirect Object and it is translated into Romanian by Predicat verbal simplu. Modul Indicativ trecut Mai mult ca perfectul E: ... and after doing her errand... R: ... i dup ce-i ncheiase treburile... (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.49) In this case the Gerund functions as Adverbial Modifier of Time and it is randered as Verb, which functions as Adverbial Modifier of Time. Thus, the English Gerund is rendered into Romanian by means of the verb in the Indicative Mood at the tenses Present and Past. c) Infinitiv In the most cases the Gerund syntactically appears as Prepositional Object and it is translated into Romanian as Verb with syntactical function of Prepositional Object, the folowing example demonstrate this fact: E: ... but she had a pleasant gift for keaping the conversation. R: ... avea ns admirabila facultate de a ntreine conversaia. (Maugham W.S. The moon and Six Pence p.64) E: ... who take a malicious pleasure in representing the great figures of romance... R: ... care i fac o plcere rutcioas din a nfia marile figuri romantice ... The Gerund is translated as Verb with syntactical function of Indirect Objects E: ... and perhaps she liked the idea of building my virgin steps. R: ea probabil o tenta ideea de a-mi indruma primii pasi (Christie A. The mystery of the blue trainp.46) In English sentence, the Gerund functions as an Attribute being introduced by the Preposition of. This Attribute determines the Noun ideea. The preposition of is translated in the Romanian case by preposition de. E: The friar started by telling the Bishop how good and pious the women were R: Calugarul incepe prin a-i spune Episcopului ce bune si evlavioase erau amandoua femeile . . . 52

Here, the Gerund syntactically appears as Adverbial Modifier of Manner, in Romanian is rendered by a Verb with similar function and by Predicat verbal compus. E: He seldom comes without bringing them sth, and soon they were able to eat meat every day that the Church allowed it. R: Rareori venea fara a le aduce cate ceva si curand izbutira si ei sa manance zilnic atata carne cat le ingaduia Biserica. In the Romanian sentence we have the Complement Circumstantial Concesiv. E: even at the risk of boring the reader R: chiar cu riscul de a-1 plictisi pe cititor. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.26,p34,p67-68) The Gerund as Attribute is translated into Romanian as Infinitive Verb with function of Attrbute. d) Modul Condiional, Prezent E: - I fell that by dwelling on some trick of speech... R: - Snt sigur c dac a insista asupra vreunui tip de vorbire... (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.26) In this sentence the Gerund appears as Preposition Object and it is translated as verb with syntactical function of Indirect Object. E: ... I saw no sharm in asking a few questions. R: ... nu vedeam de ce n-a fi pus i eu cteva ntrebri. (p.46) In this case the English Gerund is translated as Verb with syntactical function of Direct Object. e) Mod Conjunctiv, Prezent E: - But poverty did not prevent Domingo from enjoying life. R: Dar srcia nu-l mpiedica pe Domingo s se bucure de via. E: - and fed without satisfying the curiosity of the public. R: ... i hrnind curiozitatea publicului, fr s-o satisfac ns. E: He turned to the left and marched along at a good pace without once turning his head. R: O lu la stnga i pi n lungul ei cu pai msurai fr s ntoarc mcar o dat capul. E: a hat much in need of brushing. R: o plrie tare, care avea mare nevoie sa fie periat. In all this cases the Verb syntactically function as Indirect Object. Thus, the semantical field is unchanged and the meaning is the same. 53

E: you had much opportunity of judging. R: ai avut prea mare ocazie s o constai . The Verb in this sentence, syntactically functions as Attribute but in the Romanian case is Predicat verbal compus. E: he went on opening letter and sorting them. R: i continua s deschid scrisorile, s le sorteze. E: a small foot had never prevented an editor from taking your stuff. R: piciorul mic i frumos inclat nu va mpiedica desigur niciodat nici un editor s-i accepte lucrarea. In this two cases the Verbs with syntactical function of Direct Object are expressed by Predicat verbal compus in the Romanian sentence. E: I might find ways of whistling Derek back to you. R: A putea gsi mijloace s-l fac pe Derek s se intoarc la tine. E: She went on chatting away about one person. R: i continua sa sporoviasc despre una si alta. (Maugham W.S. The moon and Six Pence p79, p83, p26) The Gerund is translated as Verb with syntactical function of Predicate: Predicat verbal simplu in the first sentence and Predicat verbal compus in the second case. f) Subiect E: ... a discert smile of greeting R: ... un zmbet discret de salut The English Gerund is translated into Romanian as Noun with syntactical function of Attribute and it is introduced by Preposition of. E: the traffic prevented us from speaking. R: circulaia n-a ntrerupt discuia Here, we have the Gerund translated as Noun with syntactical function of Direct Object. E: the Mac Andrews will pay for their schooling. R: soii Mac Andrew i vor intreine la studii. E: Beatriz at that age was pay, passionately pond of dancing. R: La vrsta aceia Beatriz era vesela, pasionat de dans. E: She had a real passion for reading. R: Avea o adevrat pasiune pentru lectur (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.21; p.32; p.29) 54

In all this free cases the Gerund is translated also by Noun plus Preposition of, for but,with the syntactical function of Indirect Object. E: I had no warning - nothing. R: Eu ns n-am primit nici un avertisment nimic. E: which finally set at rest the misgivings of all lovers of art. R: care n sfrit puse capt nelinitii tuturor iubitorilor de art E: streets were crowded and there was a great shouting and a clapping of hands R: strzile erau aglomerate i rsunar multe strigte i aplauze. (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.43,p.34) Also the Gerund can appeares syntactically as Direct Object, and the equivalent in Romanian is Noun with function of Direct Object. In the last example the Gerund is expresed by Complement direct in the Romanian variant. E: The occasion of the coming of Don Juans two sons was not only the return of Don Manuel. R: Prilejul ntoarcerii celor doi fii ai lui Don Juan nu-l constituia numai revenirea din rzboaie lungi a lui Don Manuel. In this sentence the Gerund syntactically appeares as Preposition Object and it is translated as Noun with syntactical function of Attribute. E: - The importance of preserving the faith in its purity... R: - Importana pstrrii puritii cretine ... (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.29-46) But in this case , the Noun has the syntactical function of Direct Object . g) Participiu substantival E: - In a minute she returned ushering in a stronger. R: - ntr-o clip se ntoarse nsoit de un strin solid. (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.61) We observed hier that the Gerund syntactically appears as Adverbial Modifier of Maner, in the Romanian has the equivalent of Participle. It may be translated as Participiu substantival functions as Adverbial Modifier of Manner. Participiu adjectival E: - A man of learning and a poet R: - Un om nvat i poet. (Maugham W.S. Catalina p.40) 55

The English Gerund functions as Attribute and it is translated into Romanian with the same function. h) Gerunziu E: ... and finisshed by repeating the story. R: ... sfri repetnd povestea. E: - Of their elders some, by imitating the antics of youth... R: - Civa dintre cei vrstnici cutnd s mai mueasc tineretul ... In these two cases the Gerund mai be translated as verb with similar function of Adverbial Modifier of Manner. The English Gerund may also be translated into Romanian using the Romanian Gerunziul, proving some cases of coincidence. Thus, we have cases of absolute coincidence: repetnd for repeating the same verbs; and also we have cases of relative coincidence cutnd for imitating (the verbs are different in spelling and similar in meaning). E: - On turning a corner he come upon a scene of same activity. R: Dnd col, se pomeni martorul unei scene animate. The Gerund as Adverbial Modifier of Time in this sentence is rendered into Romanian by Gerund with the same function: Adverbial Modifier of Time. E: And yet, in leading to such a conclusion, an onlooker would have been wrong. R: i totui, grbindu-se s trag o asemenea concluzie, privitorul s -ar fi inelat. In this cases the Gerund, syntactically appears as Preposition Object and it is translated as Gerund with syntacticall function of Adverbial Modifier of Maner. E: without thinking she slithered down the stair on her backside, helping herself R: Fr s mai stea pe gnduri s-a lsat s alunece pe spate n jos pe scri oprindu-se n mini E: he earned money by writing letters R: cstig ceva bani redactnd scrisori E: thus not only rendering a service to God, but also edifying the people. R: aducndu-se astfel un mare serviciu nu numai lui Dumnezeu, ci i cauzei luminrii poporului. E: I tried to conceal my embarrassment by handing round cups of tee. R : ncercam s-mi ascund stngciile, ajutnd gazdei s mpart invitailor cetile de ceai. The Gerund syntactically appears as Adverbial Modifier of Manner and in Romanian has the same equivalent in all four cases. E: On arriving back at the Savoy, he gives a curt-order 56

R : Ajungnd napoi la Savoy, i ddu un ordin scurt E: On coming to Castle Rodriguez R: Venind la Castelul Rodrigouz . . . Recitind cele ce am scris . . . (Christie A. The mystery of the Blue Train p.43-64-82, p89, p45, p62) In this three cases the Gerund functions as Adverbial Modifier of Time and it is translated into Romanian as Gerundial construction and Gerund as Adverbial Modifier of Time. Thus we came to the conclusion, that although there are differences between English Gerund and Participle, they are very closed and sometimes it is hard to distinguish whether is a gerund or participle. As to the characteristics of the English Gerund and the Romanian Gerunziul we can notice that they have some common features: a) First of all their background, the English Gerund was formed from the infinitive without particle to plus the ending ing The Romanian Gerunziul was built also from infinitive plus the ending ind and nd b) The English Gerund as well the Romanian Gerunziul is non-finite forms of the verb c) They cannot be full predication in the sentences only semi-predication d) Their syntactic function in the sentences, they can be both adverbial modifiers While studying the examples, we have come across a peculiar thing: The Romanian Gerunziul is very often rendered into English by means of participle and participial constructions, which allows us to consider that the English Gerund and the English Participle are very close. Thus, the English Gerund undergoes lexical and semantically changes; i.e. 1) 2) The Gerund in English is rendered by a noun in Romanian; Gerund in English is rendered by a verb in a different mood;

According to our analysis in the most cases the Gerund is rendered into Romanian as: / Gerund; / Noun, /Verb in different moods: Modul Conjunctiv, Prezent, Modul Infinitiv, Modul Indicativ Prezent. It should be mentioned that in the process of translating the nounal and verbal characteristics of the Gerund are subject to changes for example: the semi-dynamic character of the Gerund is transformed into a static character in Romanian in most of the cases when the Gerund is translated by means of a noun.

57

CONCLUSIONS

Concerning the gerund and participle categorial forms, they are differently interpreted by various linguists: some linguistic schools think that all the verbal forms ending in ing should belong to ing forms. Other scholars think that present participle and gerund represent different homonymous non-finite categorial, each of which is fulfilling quite specific functions. Among the second group of linguists discrepancies have appeared as to how to differentiate between the functions of the gerund and participle and their depending on their formal combination with certain syncategorematic lexical units. The first subgroup of scholars think that the formal factor is very important in case of gerund: the use of preposition in any function (even in the function of adverbial modifiers), also the functions of subject and predicate. Ganshina, M A., Vasileskaya N. M. also consider that the characteristic traits of the non-finite forms consist in the fact that they have a double nature, nominal and verbal. Their tense distinctions are not absolute, but relative; the form of a verbal does not show whether the action it denotes refers to the present, past or future; it shows only whether the action expressed by the verbal' is simultaneous with the action expressed by the finite verb or prior to it. All the non-finite forms can form predicative constructions, i.e. constructions consisting of two elements, a nominal (noun or pronoun) and a verbal (participle, gerund or infinitive); the verbal element stands in predicate relation to the nominal element, i. e. in a relation similar to that between the subject and the predicate of the sentence. In most cases, predicative constructions form syntactic units, serving as one part of the sentence. The ing forms have the function of adverbial modifier of time, usually carriead out by present participle forms. Besides, here they can be translated into Romanian by means of gerunziul, which regularly corresponds to the English present participle (some other grammatical forms are possible to be used in Romanian: mai mult ca perfectul, long infinitive, perfectul compus).The categorial meaning of anteriority is expressed both grammatically, lexicogrammatically and lexically. Gerunziul historically took over the meanings and functions of participial present, when it got out of usage. Thus, the difference between gerund and participle is that the gerund is closer to the noun in its functions (subject and object), and the participle is closer to the adjective, and may have the functions of an attribute or adverbial modifier. In their perfect forms they both express anteriority. If the actions follow one after the other, a simple form (non-perfect) is used, anteriority being expressed simply lexically or contextually, because there is no need to intensify it by grammatical anteriority. Confronting the participle and gerund, perfect 58

forms in English and Romanian it was observed that they are relatively more often used in English than in Romanian, where predicative forms are preferred. The Romanian gerunziul is naturally confronted with the English participle I and does not correspond to the English gerund (taking into consideration the point of view of the second subgroup of linguists mentioned above). A durative action expressed by participle I in a context in the past can easily be rendered into Romanian by means of imperfect forms, which express a continuous and unfinished action in the past. The translator prefers in the Romanian variant the expressive forms of imperfectul, but the form of gerunziul would be much more expressive if used in such cases. Gerunziul is regularly confronted with prezent participle in English. Romanian prefesr past perfect forms when the English gerund is accompanied by lexical anteriority means (after). In Romanian the forms of gerunziul or long infinitive and contextual anteriority may be used. Perfectul compus (or gerunziul) can also be used to corespond to the English present participle with lexical anteriority. Romanian also prefers past perfect forms when the English gerund is accompanied by lexical anteriority means (after). In Romanian the forms of gerunziul or long infinitive and contextual anteriority may be used in such cases. Perfectul compus (or gerunziul) can also be used to corespond to the English present participle with lexical anteriority. Participle I and gerunziul may be used to form aspectual durative forms. Both the participle I and gerunziul (and also the English Gerund) express a durative action, an action in progress or development, expressed purely grammatically. The verbs possessing a durative lexical meaning (interminative) can express continuous aspect both lexically and lexicogrammatically, the latter being emphatic or intensified aspectually. As to the characteristics of the English gerund and Romanian gerunziu we can notice that they have some common features: a) First of all their background, English gerund was formed from the infinitive without particle "to" plus the ending "ing" The Romanian Gerunziul was built also from infinitive plus the ending "ind" and "nd"; b) English Gerund as well Romanian Gerunziul is non-finite forms of the verb; c) They cannot be full predication in the sentences only semi-predication; d) Their syntactic function in the sentences, thy can be both Adverbial Modifier; It is seen that the English Gerund is more frequent and while studying the examples, we have come across a peculiar thing. The English Gerund is very often rendered into Romanian by means of Participle and Participial Constructions, which allows us to consider that the English Gerund and the English Participle are very close. 59

After studying the Gerund in English and Romanian languages, we can conclude that both non-finite forms, i.e. the English Gerund and the Romanian Geruziul are widely spread in both languages. Still, the English Gerund is more frequently used. Generally examples of Gerundial Phrases and Constructions have been used in the present paper. The English Gerundial Phrases are translated into Romanian by means of modul Conjunctiv Prezent in most cases. This fact allows considering that the English Participle and the Romanian Gerunziul are very close. Such results are in the favour of treating the English Gerund and Participle as one and the same form - "ing" form. However, it must be said that this is one of the questions, which do not admit of a definite solution. The decision largely depends on the general attitude a person takes in such matters. While studying the examples, we have come across a peculiar thing: although the Gerund is rendered from one language into another by various means, the cases of full coincidence are very rare. It is worth mentioning that the English phrase or construction rendered into Romanian by "construcie gerunzial is a very peculiar thing, though there are such cases. From the results of the comparative study, we can clearly see the ways of rendering the gerund and participle from English into Romanian languages. The Gerund from English into Romanian: Ind. Prezent, Ind. TrecutPerf. Simplu,

Perf.compus, Imperfect, M. mult ca Perf., Infinitiv, Conditional, Prezent, Conjunctiv, Prezent, Substantiv, Participiul substantival, djectival, Gerunziul. The Participle I from English into Romanian: Indicativ Trecut -Perfect Simplu, Perfect Compus, Imperfect, Indicativ- Viitor Forma I, Indicativ Prezent, Infinitiv, Conditional trecut, Conjunctiv Prezent, Imperativ negativ Interogativ, Subst + Prep, Substantiv, Gerunziu, Participiu adjectival, verbal , Adjectiv. Thus, we see that the means of translation in both languages are just the same, but the cases of concidence are rare. As a result of its origin and development the English Gerund has nominal and verbal properties, while the Romanian Gerunziul alongside with the first two, has Adjective and Adverb characteritics. The Adverb characteristics show the manner in which the action of the predicate verb is performed. Having Adjective characteristics the Romanain Gerunziul agrees with the Noun in Gender, Number and Case. The results of the comparative study may be rendered as follows: 1. The Gerund in both languages has verb-characteristics. The English Gerund as well as the Romanian Gerunziul has the category of voice, which is a universal one. The English Gerund has two voices: active and passive, while the Romanian Gerunziul has one.more - diateza reflexiva. 60

The Gerund in both languages has the category of tense, which comprise relative time indication. The Gerund may be modified by adverbs in both languages .In addition, the English Gerund may be modified by an object, as to the Romanian Gerunziul, it is modified by compliment. 2. The English Gerund as well as the Romanian Gerunziul has noun-characteristics. But it should be mentioned that the English Gerund is found as a Subject, an Object (direct, prepositional indirect), an Adverbial Modifier, a Predicative very frequently, while the noun characteristics of the Romanian Gerunziul is rarely demonstrated. This is due to the fact that the English Gerund has developed more Noun characteristics, while the Gerund in Romanian has retained more properties of the verb. Thus, having Verb characteristics in most cases the Gerund comes into predicate relations with other words and may perform a variety of function in the sentence. The comparative study shows that the Gerund in both languages may perform practically the same functions. Still, the English Gerund is more frequently used in the function of the Attribute and Adverbial Modifier, as to the Romanian Gerunziul, it occurs in most cases, in the function of compliment (toate complimentele verbale). To crown it all, the Gerund in English and Romanian are quite different and occupy a peculiar position in the system of the language. Their not ordinary usage in various cases makes both languages more expressive.

61

Bibliography
1. Alien, W. Stannard "Living English Structure" London,1955 2. Akhmanova 0. "The morphology of the English verb", Moscow, 1975 3. Alien, R.L. "The System of Present -day American English" The Hague, 1966 4. Bull, William "Times Tense of the Verb" Berkeley, 1971 5. Bunner, Karl "An Outline of Middle English Grammar" Oxford, 6. Butler, Ch. "The English Grammar" Bucureti, 1977 7. Bdescu A. "Gramatica limbii engleze", Bucureti, 1973 8. Banta A. "Essential English", Bucureti, 1993. 9. .. , , 1983. 10. Brbua I., Constantinovici E. Gramatica uzual a limbii romne, Bucureti, 2000. 11. Bejan D. Gramatica limbii romne, Cluj, 1995. 12. Belenkaya V.D. "Modern English morphology, Moscow, 1996. 13. Berceanu . Sistemul gramatical al limbii romne, Bucureti, 1971. 14. Caragiu M. Sintaxa gerunziului romnesc, Bucureti, 1957. 15. Cioran I. Capitole de morfologie a limbii romne, Chiinu, 1989. 16. Close R.A. A reference grammar for students of English, Moscow, 1979. 17. Cobb ., Gardiner R. Today's English Grammar Bucureti, 1994. 18. Coteanu I. "Gramatica de baza a limbii romne",Bucureti, 1982. 19. Callaway Jr. "Concerning the Origin of the Gerund" London, 1901 20. Chafe V. "Structures of English" London, 1956 21. Charles Dickens " Aventurile lui Oliver Twist" las, 1988 22. Charles Dickens " The adventures of Oliver Twist" M, 1974 23. Ciobanu A " Probleme dificile de gramatic" Bucureti, 1968 24. Close R. " A reference Grammar for Students of English" Cluj, 1976. 25. Christie A.Misterul trenului albastru. Excelsior - Multi/Press. Bucureti, 1992. 26. Compbell A. Old English Grammar Moscow, 1979 27. Comilescu-Petrovanu, Alexandra "Towards a Semantic Description of Tense in English and Romanian" Bucharest, 1992 28. Crume C.O. "History of English Gerund" London, 1956 62

29. Cottle, Basil "The triumph of English " London, 1986 30. Diver, William "The chronological System of the verb" Oxford, 1954. 31. Dimitriu C. Gramatica limbii romne explicate", lai, 1992. 32. Edelstein F. "Sintaxa gerunziului romnesc"Bucureti, 1972. 33. Eric Partridge, "Usage and Abusage" Oxford, 1988 34. Gordon E.M., Krylova I.P. "A Grammar of present day English", Moscow, 1980. 35. Gordon E.M., Krylova I.P. "The English verbals", Moscow, 1973. 36. GraurA."Gramatica limbii romne",Bucureti, 1973. 37. Jrimia D. "Morfo-sintaxa verbului romnesc", Bucureti, 1997. 38. .. . , 1981. 39. .. ,1967. 40. Kobrina N.A. "An English Grammar", Moscow, 1985. 41. .. , , 1963. 42. Maugham W.S. Catalina Octopus Publis hing Group. London, 1991. 43. Maugham W.S. The Moon and Sixpence Progress. Moscow, 1972. 44. Maugham W.S. CatalinaTraducerea Banta A. Victoria. Bucureti, 1992. 47.Maugham W.S. Luna i doi bani jumate Editu ra pentru literatura Universala Bucureti, 1963. 48. Paidos . Gramatica limbii engleze. Verbul, Iai, 1995. 49. Palmer H. "A Grammar of spoken english", Cambridge, 1976. 50. Tolocenco P.V ."Gerundiul. Natura gramatical i funciile sintactice."Chiinu 1978.

63