The use of verbal phrases with gerund constructions

The importance of verbals in forming predicative constructions.

The characteristic traits of the verbal’s are follows:

5. 
   They have a double nature, nominal and verbal. The parti­ciple combines the characteristics of a verb with those of an ad­jective; the gerund and the infinitive combine the characteristics of a verb with those of a noun.
   
6. 
   The tense distinctions of the verbal’s are not absolutes (like those of the finite verb), 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 tee action expressed by the verbal is simultaneous with the action expressed by the finite verb or prior to it.
   
7. 
   All the verbal’s 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.
   

They sat down to supper, Manson still talking cheerfully.
Manson still talking cheerfully is a predicative construction with a participle: the participle talking stands in predicate relation to the noun Manson, which denotes the doer of the action expressed by the participle.


1.3. Predicative constructions with the participle
The secondary tenses the perfect tenses
Origin of the Perfect Form
In Old English the verb to have, used as the predicate of a sentence, was sometimes followed by a direct object with participle II of a transitive verb attached to it in the function of a predicative adjective. The participle agreed in number, gender and case with the direct object. Heheefp boc 3ewriten (=he has that book written) As the state of the object (written) was the result of an accomplished action, the mind of the speaker began to be interested in that action. This construction did not show whether the action expressed by participle 11 was performed by the subject of the sentence or by some other agent. It was from constructions where the subject of the sentence was the doer of the action denoted by the past parti­ciple, that the Modern English perfect form developed. The participle lost its forms of agreement with the noun-object and, changing its place (He has written...), became closely connected with the verb to have. Both elements lost their independent meaning and merged into one sense unit — the analytical form of the Modern English perfect. He has written that book — the action of writing is accomplished by him at present and as a result of it the book is in a written state.
Thus, what was originally a free syntactical combination has now turned into an analytical tense form.
Such constructions, in which the doer of the action expressed by the parti­ciple was not the subject of the sentence, have still survived in Modern English as free syntactical combinations: He had three horses killed under him I have my dresses made here Killed and made are still predicative adjectives to the direct objects horses and dresses. .
In constructions with the verb to be, participle II of an intransitive verb was used as a predicative to the subject with which it agreed in number, gender and case, and the verb to be had the function of a link-verb in a com­pound nominal predicate: He is When the have- and the fee-forms turned into’ the perfect, the verb to have began gradually to be used as an auxiliary with both transitive and intransitive verbs: / have seen her. I have come.
As a survival of the old construction, to be is still used when the state is stressed:
May Fielding was already come; and so was her mother. (D i с k e n s.) When he was gone, my mother asked me all about the day I had had... (Dickens.) “He is gone to the Leas...” (В г о n t ё.)
THE USE OF THE PERFECT TENSES
THE COMMON ASPECT
The perfect tenses are compound (analytical) tenses. They are formed by means of the auxiliary verb to have and the past parti­cipl The Present Perfect (Common Aspect)

Affirmative	Negative	Interrogative
I have written he has written we have written you have written they have written	I have not written he has not written we have not written you have not written they have not written	have I written? has he written? have we written? have you written? have they written?

8. 
   The shortened affirmative forms are: I've written, he's written, we've written, etc.
   
9. 
   The shortened negative forms am: I haven’t written, he hasn’t written, etc.
   
10. 
    The negative-interrogative forms are: Have I not written? or Haven’t written? Has he not written? or Hasn’t he written?, etc.
    

The Use of the Present Perfect of the Common Aspect
The present perfect of the common aspect is used to con­nect a past action with the present time:

1. 
   as having results or consequences bearing on the present moment:
   

I have opened the window. This means that I opened the win­dow at some time in the past and that it is still open. The train has arrived. This means that the train arrived at some time in the past and that it is still at the platform.

2. 
   as continued up to the present moment:
   

3 He has studied English for two years. This means that he be­gan to study English at some time in the past and that he is still studying it. I have lived in Moscow for ten years. This means that I came to live in Moscow at some time in the past and that I am still living in Moscow.
In both cases the present perfect connects the past with the present. The present perfect is not used when the action is not con­nected with the present. In such a case the past tense is used.
Compare the following:
I have turned on the light — means that the light is still on.
I turned on the light — means only that the action was performed at some time in the past without implying its connection with the present.
Не has lived in Moscow for two years — means that he is still living in Moscow.
He lived in Moscow for two years — means that he is no longer in Moscow.
The Use of the Present Perfect of the Common Aspect to Express Actions Already Accomplished

11. 
    The present perfect of the common aspect is used to express an action already completed before the present situation but connected with the present situation in its conse­quences.
    

The character of this connection depends on the lexical character of the verb and on the general situation. (See “Terminative, Dura- tive and Mixed Verbs,” p. 135).
With terminative verbs in case of a single action the relation between the accomplished action and the present state is that of cause and result — the accomplished action is the cause of the present state which is its result:
I have torn the paper in two (now the paper is torn in two).
I have broken my pencil (now the pencil is broken). She has written the word table on the blackboard (now the word table is written on the blackboard). I have come (now I am here). The rain has stopped (now it is not raining any longer).
“You have brought Caddy back, 1 see,” observed Mrs. Jelly- by... (Dickens.) “Have you arranged everything?” she asked. (Voynich.) “I have just brought you a message from Zita Reni. (Voynich), “...this plant, hidden from the light, has kept its flow­ers till the autumn.” (Kingsley.)
I have torn the paper in two. —
I have broken my pencil. —
With durative verbs the relation between the accomplished action and the present state is of a different character. The accomplished action has certain consequences in the present, it gives the subject a certain experience:
“I’ve seen a man.. (Chesterton. He has travelled a great deal, and seen a great deal of the world, I should think. (Bronte.) “...Has Miss Summer son lost both her parents?” (Dickens.) “I have been an apprentice, and a workman. I have lived on workman’s
good many things in my time,” said the old
Не has lived in Moscow for two years — means that he is still living in Moscow.
He lived in Moscow for two years — means that he is no longer in Moscow.
The Use of the Present Perfect of the Common Aspect to Express Actions Already Accomplished

12. 
    The present perfect of the common aspect is used to express an action already completed before the present situation but connected with the present situation in its conse­quences.
    

The character of this connection depends on the lexical character of the verb and on the general situation. (See “Terminative, Dura- time and Mixed Verbs,” p. 135).
With terminative verbs in case of a single action the relation between the accomplished action and the present state is that of cause and result — the accomplished action is the cause of the present state which is its result:
I have torn the paper in two (now the paper is torn in two).
I have broken my pencil (now the pencil is broken). She has written the word table on the blackboard (now the word table is written on the blackboard). I have come (now I am here). The rain has stopped (now it is not raining any longer).
“You have brought Caddy back, 1 see,” observed Mrs. Jelly- by... (Dickens.) “Have you arranged everything?” she asked. (Vanish.) “I have just brought you a message from Ziti Reni. (Vanish), “...this plant, hidden from the light, has kept its flow­ers till the autumn.” (Kingsley.)
I have torn the paper in two. — etc.
With durative verbs the relation between the accomplished action and the present state is of a different character. The accomplished action has certain consequences in the present, it gives the subject a certain experience:
“I’ve seen a
man.. (Chesterton. He has travelled a great deal, and seen a great deal of the world, I should think. (Bronte.) “...Has Miss Summer son lost both her parents?” (Dickens.) “I have been an apprentice, and a workman. I have lived on workman’s
good many things in my time,” said the old
wages, years and years, and... have had to educate myself. (Dickens.)
Depending on the context, the present perfect of terminative verbs may lose its regulative character and become similar in mean­ing to the present perfect of durative verbs. This is the case when the context shows repeated actions:
She has often opened the window and sat for hours looking out into the garden (it does not mean that the window is open now. Compare with a single action when Ice results of it are seen in the present — She has opened the window, that is why it is rather cold in the room— the window is still open). She has often gone to the Zoo with the children (it does not mean that she is there now. Com­pare with a single action: She has gone — which means that she is no longer here).

13. 
    When the present perfect is used, there may be no time indi­cation in the sentence at all:
    

“How late you are! Where have you been?” (Dickens.) “Have you heard anything of Fleur?” — “Yes.” (Galsworthy.) “You have chosen a fine day,” he said. (Lawrence.) “Have you been in England?” asked Martin. (Dickens.)
The cultural revolution accomplished in the Soviet Union has led to the formation of a vast army of Soviet intelligentsia.
But often we find the following time indication in the sentence in connection with the present perfect:

3. 
   The action is associated with a period of time which has not yet ended: to-day, this week, this month, this year, etc.:
   

“To-day I have read The Tempest(G is sing.) “Your advice has helped me to-day.” (M e r e d i t h.)Chavez you seen Mr. Wood- court this morning, Guardian?” (Dickens.) 1 have never heard Mr. Rochester’s voice or step in the house to-day.” (Born- t§.) This has been a year of long sunshine. Month has followed month with little unkindness of the sky... (Gissing.)
Note.— But sentences containing such adverbial expressions as to-day, this week, etc., may refer to some definite part of the period, mentioned or implied: then the past tense is used.
I saw him to-day engaged in a lively conversation (when I saw him, he was engaged in a lively conversation). I was late to-day (meaning a certain fixed time when I was to be at that place). I lost my tram ticket to-day (when I was riding in the tram). A friend, who called to-day, told me this (when he called).
In all these sentences the action is not regarded from the point of view of its present result.
A period of time which is still lasting may also be indicated by since (a preposition, an adverb or a conjunction introducing a subor­dinate clause); since denotes from a certain moment in the past up to now:
“You have changed since your accident.” (Saroyan.) (a preposition) “Since 1 saw you last, Jan had been desperately ill.” (Cusack.) (a conjunction) I have often thought about the mat­ter since. (Jerome.) (an adverb)
Notice the use of the past tense in the subordinate clause introduced by since which marks the beginning of the period of time.

14. 
    The time is indicated by means of an adverb of indefinite time or frequency: often, seldom, rarely, never, sometimes, gen­erally, just, already, etc.:
    

“I’ve never seen the boy in my life,” replied Somas with perfect truth. (Galsworthy.)! have just opened this window, to let in a little air and sunshine...” (Bronte.)I have not yet looked at the newspaper. (Gissing.) “I’ve just' had a letter from Aunt Augusta.” (Matzo de la Roche.) “I’ve always admired your pluck...” (Galsworthy.) ...already... the first radiant verdure, has begun to pass into summer’s soberness. (Gissing.)
Note 1. — But if those adverbs refer to a definite past time, the pa si tense is used:
I often went there last year. I seldom met her when we lived at the seaside.
Note 2.— In connection with just now the past tense is always used:
I told you so just now. The postman was here just now.
Note 3 . — Once (twice, etc.) may be combined with both the past tense and the present perfect.
Past tense: I saw him only once (when he was here).
“I heard her twice in Budapest... A perfect soprano.” (Hitches.)
Present perfect: I have seen him only once (in the whole of my life).

4. 
   The present perfect is not used when speaking about people who are dead, except when something is stated as the present result of their activities: