This is an assignment for Simone's adoption program. You are welcome to edit this page if you notice any errors or have any additional information to add, but as a courtesy, please notify OrenBochman if you make any major changes to avoid any possible confusion between him and his adoptee(s). Thanks!
Ethel Richardson (1870–1946), who wrote under the pseudonym Henry Handel Richardson, was a significant novelist during Australia's movement out of the colonial period. I'm sure she was careful to use noun plus -ing in only the most elegant contexts.
These exercises present sentences containing unsatisfactory instances of the common grammatical construction, "noun plus -ing" (verbal noun). First, locate the verbal noun; then, think of a solution that is grammatical. Hit the three "shows" at the right and you'll be taken step by step through ways of fixing it; try to think of the answers first.
Explanation
This construction—also known as "with" plus [noun] plus -ing—is often grammatically ambiguous, where the "-ing" phrase could either qualify the noun (adjectival) or be part of a possessive construction in which the noun "owns" the action. These two constructions seem to have become confused in modern English; the result is that "noun plus -ing" is often used clumsily. The context and wording varies with respect to how well you can get away with it (even Jane Austen "gets away with it" on occasion!). "Noun plus -ing" can be seen in:
"I object to him being there", in which "him" is the noun. We need to stop and think before using it, given that it can almost always be replaced with a neater construction.
"Us going to the movies tomorrow? I doubt it." In a formal register, the possessive is required: "Our going to ...". Or just drop the first word if it's clear in the context.
However, .... a quite acceptable usage is "The archaeological finds included silver pendants of females bearing drinking horns." Here, "bearing drinking horns" looks like some kind of adjectival phrase, qualifying females. Perhaps this is the root of the problem: two quite different grammatical structures that have become confused.
The 15th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style (2008), p. 193, labels the "with + noun + -ing" construction as "slovenly", although it fails to analyse why this is so or to distinguish between the slovenly and the ungrammatical. CMOS gives the example "They all went to the beach with me being left to wash the dishes", but does not take the opportunity of providing a simple alternative—perhaps, "They all went to the beach leaving me to wash the dishes".
Ways of avoiding the construction. There are several ways of avoiding "noun + -ing", such as:
Making the noun a possessive: "I object to his being there, or more formally, "I object to his presence (there)).
Using a more substantial rewording: "I object to the fact that he's there"; however, most folk would find this ungainly, and it's hard to go against that.
When the verbal noun is introduced using "with", as a clumsy connector with the previous text: ("We can't do much, with him being there".) Getting rid of "with" should be part of your rewording.
Here "with" is clumsy because it fails to clarify the relationship between the preceding and subsequent text that is being attempted to be linked: additive, contrastive or causal?
Sometimes the readers can work it out, although usually with a smidgeon of extra work;
Smetimes it's difficult or impossible to know, and you just slide over it with a slight sense of fuzziness.
The book starts as a chronological autobiography, with Suzuki recounting his childhood.
It's here:
The book starts as a chronological autobiography, with Suzuki recounting his childhood.
Hint
"With" is usually a bad connector; you can tackle that problem and fix the noun + -ing problem at the same time.
The solution
The book starts as a chronological autobiography in which Suzuki recounts his childhood.
Note
"In which" allows us to both dispense with clumsy "with", connecting the subsequent clause with the previous clause properly, and to change the noun + -ing into a grammatical structure.
Doping scandals have resulted in a number of athletes being stripped of their medals.
It's here:
Doping scandals have resulted in a number of athletes being stripped of their medals.
The solution
Doping scandals have resulted in the stripping of medals from a number of athletes.
Note
Alternatively: "Doping scandals have resulted in a number of athletes' being stripped of their medals"—this is unusual nowadays, but nevertheless efficient and grammatical.
The inspiration for the promoters was the initial success of the City & South London Railway, which had seen large passenger numbers using its trains in its first year of operation.
It's here:
The inspiration for the promoters was the initial success of the City & South London Railway, which had seen large passenger numbers using its trains in its first year of operation.
Hint
Some lateral thinking might lead to the best solution: the "its ... its ..." problem can be solved at the same time.
The solution
The inspiration for the promoters was the initial success of the City & South London Railway, which had seen large passenger numbers using its trains in its first year of operation.
Notes
The removal of three redundant words kills two birds with one keystroke. In another context, it might have worked to replace the problematic "using" with "on".
You could reword it with only a slight change of meaning: "... which had seen many passengers in the first year of operation." After all, in this context what else would "passengers" be riding?
The organisers had originally planned a confrontation between the cast of the Jackass TV series and Umaga, with the feud concluding in a match at SummerSlam.
It's here:
The organisers had originally planned a confrontation between the cast of the Jackass TV series and Umaga, with the feud concluding in a match at SummerSlam.
The solution
The organisers had originally planned a confrontation between the cast of the Jackass TV series and Umaga, and the conclusion of the feud in a match at SummerSlam.
Note
Here, we've simply nominalised the problem; there may be other solutions.
Less than two months after the Club's success, Jewell left to join Sheffield, with his assistant Chris Hutchings replacing him as manager.
It's here:
Less than two months after the Club's success, Jewell left to join Sheffield, with his assistant Chris Hutchings replacing him.
Think of using a different form of the word "replacing" and shifting it to a little after the comma.
The solution
Less than two months after the Club's success, Jewell left to join Sheffield, to be replaced by his assistant, Chris Hutchings.
It's more elegant, avoids the grammatical glitch, but changes the meaning ever so slightly. How? The emphasis is now subtly shifted towards Chris Hutchings. If that's not OK, think of some other way of rewording.
Perhaps breaking the sentence into two might do. "Less than two months after the Club's success, Jewell left to join Sheffield. His assistant, Chris Hutchings, replaced him as manager."
The original plan for the Normandy campaign envisioned strong offensive efforts in both sectors, with Lieutenant-General Sir Miles Dempsey's British Second Army securing Caen and the area south of it, and General Omar Bradley's United States First Army "wheeling round" to the Loire.
It's here:
The original plan for the Normandy campaign envisioned strong offensive efforts in both sectors, with Lieutenant-General Sir Miles Dempsey's British Second Army securing Caen and the area south of it, and General Omar Bradley's United States First Army "wheeling round" to the Loire.
"In which" is probably the best solution. How is it done?
The solution
"The original plan for the Normandy campaign envisioned strong offensive efforts in both sectors, in which Lieutenant-General Sir Miles Dempsey's British Second Army would secure Caen and the area south of it, and General Omar Bradley's United States First Army would "wheel round" to the Loire.
The bonus is that the conditional-future mood/tense is explicit in the two "woulds".
A newspaper not known for good sub-editing. This example comes not from our article on the SMH, but direct from an opinion piece in the 28 August 2009 edition of the broadsheet.
The problem text
Despite the British government seizing the immediate political advantage by sending troops to Iraq, the longer-term ramifications have proved deleterious to public trust in government.
Hint
Change "Despite" to "Although" and the grammar will follow.
The solution
Although the British government seized the immediate political advantage by sending troops to Iraq, the longer-term ramifications have proved deleterious to public trust in government.
