|
|
发表于 2019-4-25 09:40:29
|
显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 klwo2 于 2019-4-25 09:46 编辑 ! p+ R( @( O" r1 j+ B! q C, |
' g/ m& K4 \" E" j9 n楼主的问题问得很好,我来解释一下。
0 [8 l0 r8 i! k# V
& E3 N3 g" E5 f {8 \为什么一般的语法书都藏着掖着,不告诉你不定式和动名词在某些环境下有什么本质区别?
, v- |; j) w) L/ I2 \' J/ z9 n( S( v0 e- X9 Q
答:因为【不定式】 (Infinitive)在很多印欧语言里面都有,要找到一个通用的解释框架不容易。请看喂鸡百科:
' `1 f( X+ g' p4 M, O; m7 ~
. Q& P1 `& i; U5 p6 \3 qInfinitive (abbreviated inf) is a grammatical term referring to certain verb forms existing in many languages, most often used as non-finite verbs. As with many linguistic concepts, there is not a single definition applicable to all languages. 6 R$ V5 k) [( R, A9 T
定义都不好下,怎么解释啊?只能说些各种语言都大致相同的地方了。
8 }6 |& Z2 J3 v7 S3 Y5 J4 {- H, n4 `) q- {4 F" ]* G7 E" t) T
有人讲,我就要明白英语的不定式。那也行,找一个野路子让你歪打正着学会了英语的不定式,结果你学了别的语言,发现套用不了,打架了,之前帮你学会英语的【野路子】成了学其他语言的【拦路虎】,这怎么行。- b+ n8 G& l1 Q, h- Y% _4 k) ~
E0 N5 L7 e. p1 a; w* E
【动名词】(Gerund)有类似的问题,咱不说别的,咱看看这段:; [: W' N5 }8 A5 m+ }5 s
3 q" p2 \* z% K. `
Thus, English grammar uses gerund to mean an -ing form used in non-finite clauses such as playing on computers. This is not a normal use for a Latin gerund. Moreover, the clause may function within a sentence as subject or object, which is impossible for a Latin gerund.
! j9 e# \' ~+ I. o, ~0 Y大家都知道,很多欧洲语言的语法都是比照着拉丁语法弄出来的,拉丁语法是妈。结果,英语里面的动名词可以做主语、宾语,拉丁语竟然不行???
6 e0 t! C3 _$ t# w9 a
3 M. L4 d: X" K. Z3 p* }0 L, l# d3 ]所以不藏着掖着怎么办呢?喂鸡百科告诉我们,现在有的语法干脆也不区分什么动名词和分词了,直接叫ing形式了:$ x T7 T. y1 J& d5 T! Q2 w9 Q
, n2 @" G' F5 H' ]. M7 @/ m( ^Traditional grammar makes a distinction within -ing forms between present participles and gerunds, a distinction that is not observed in such modern, linguistically informed grammars as A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language and The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. ; o- w' Q7 R5 f
ing形式,这话是描述长相的,简直跟汉语里面说【把字句】【被字句】差不多了。
R; ~9 i: B# u4 q9 y( \+ v% J3 V+ O0 _- M3 D+ |
所以楼主明白为什么好些语法语焉不详了吧,因为这不只是解释英语现象一个坑,这是要解释印欧语言里面所有对应现象呀!& V) W% Q# _9 r d8 X
|
|