关于动名词的一个用法不解

亲亲号

5 U# [  W4 m# d; }9 F$ I, q
动名词的形式有doing 和 having done，后者是完成式，用于发生在句子谓语动作之前的动作，
4 U: Z2 M: H1 y8 d3 s0 M$ o如That young man still denies having started the fire behind the store.
但由于start是短暂动词，这里如果只用现在分词的一般式也是正确的把？而且意义没有太大区别？
That young man still denies starting the fire behind the store.
- U, m6 t* o- c6 r3 a4 ?# @" r
类似还有这些句子
  f/ s+ U% ?5 J5 _2 q# [6 _I repented shooting/having shot the bird
  E9 G: V1 [$ Z$ E7 O" d4 d( F/ XThe man in the corner confessed to telling/having told a lie to the manager of the company.
The student denied cheating/having cheated on the exam.
8 k# A; d0 }' p% E3 L6 }
请问这样理解是正确的么？


# J* i3 I" D4 F3 j" H' ?5 Q; c. ?

nullname

个人认为，楼主这些例子里面的 having+pp 形式是从句简化导致的变形。

即：That young man still denies having started the fire behind the store. 这句话跟动名词一点关系都没有。
8 D6 F8 p( x. R6 m
我觉得上句应是下句的简化：
That young man still denies that he had started the fire behind the store.
4 p3 E1 V% M! b# ~2 d$ y( B3 \
同理：
I repented that I had shot the bird
4 D' _% Z  l9 z简化为
4 d. Q1 q3 ~4 l6 A1 w# G7 ?I repented having shot the bird
3 k  V) F- w( B+ }9 M! t; d
0 o8 i+ s4 w9 g# S2 P9 N参考：语法俱乐部   旋元佑

pisgfa

. z) g8 a& a5 `) S, Y# j两个句子都没问题，意思是一样的。having started 强调 放火发生在否认之前。
# T! w$ F+ ~+ x/ x2 }如果没有 supporting references 的话，推荐用 That young man still denies starting the fire behind the store. 更符合外国人习惯。
+ G4 I: |5 ^0 Z  f7 _* M3 g
That young man denied that he had started the fire before sunrise.

That young man still denies having started the fire before sundown.

# `. j) J, N5 U/ \- [* Y2 m5 Q
2 f5 w% A) h8 {) i

williamshein

个人同意三楼的解释，having done和doing都是可以作为动名词使用，但是语言的简化是因为用了doing不会产生误解，照样理解，并且这样还更简单，所以才简化成这样，至于楼主提到的start的短暂性，这里我觉得其实根本不需要考虑，因为不管短暂还是延续性都是发生在过去的，用having done都是为了强调发生的时间的先后顺序。用一些的初中、高中的例句来解释：I am sorry for interrupting (或having interrupted） you./ I remember locking (having locked) the door. 理解起来都是一样的。