Dallas Hinton - All:
Here's one for the non-native English Speakers:
Discuss the difference between "Its getting colder" and "Its
getting cooler". For bonus marks, discuss the difference between
"Its getting..." and "It's getting...."
I noticed the confused participle without the hint. You ought to
have reserved it as a surprise for the first responder who missed
the misssing apostrophe:
-- Mrs. Stickler, Can I open the window?
-- You certainly can, but you may not :-)
That evening, we talked mostly about the weather. --
a. Its getting colder alarmed me.
b. Its getting cooler had loosed our tongues.
Its ceasing to rain prompted our closing our umbrellas.
In "The Grammar of Englisn Grammars", Goold Brown crushes this
construction into grey dust:
The sentence is this: "Much will depend on your pupil's
composing, but more on his reading frequently."—Philos. of Rhet.,
p. 235. Volumes innumerable have gone abroad, into our schools
and elsewhere, which pronounce this sentence to be "correct and
proper." But after all, what does it mean? But after all, what
does it mean? Does the adverb "frequently" qualify the verb "will
depend" expressed in the sentence? or "will depend" understood
after more? or both? or neither? Or does this adverb qualify the
action of "reading?" or the action of "composing?" or both? or
neither? But "composing" and "reading", if they are mere nouns,
cannot properly be qualified by any adverb; and, if they are
called participles, the question recurs respecting the
possessives. Besides, "composing", as a participle, is commonly
transitive; nor is it very fit for a noun, without some adjunct.
And, when participles become nouns, their government (it is said)
falls upon "of", and their adverbs are usually converted into
adjectives; as, "Much will depend on your pupil's composing of
themes; but more, on his frequent reading." This may not be the
author's meaning, for the example was originally composed as a
mere mock sentence, or by way of "experiment;" and one may doubt
whether its meaning was ever at all thought of by the
philosopher. But, to make it a respectable example, some
correction there must be; for, surely, no man can have any clear
idea to communicate, which he cannot better express, than by
imitating this loose phraseology. It is scarcely more correct,
than to say, "Much will depend on an author's using, but more on
his learning frequently." [continued!]
Whereas Fowler is content merely to require the possessive pronoun,
e.g. pardon my/me introding upon you so.
---
* Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)