Then what is the difference between these two sentences.
To get good grades, I have to study hard.
Getting up early, I came to office one hour early.
In the first sentence, we mean "to get good grades" is what "I" intend
to do, and it serves as an adverbial phrase to state a "thing that is
not yet to happen." Then "getting up early" serves as an adjective
phrase to mean something that happened. So couldn't it be more logical
if we use "to make" to replace "making" since "the moment my own" is
not yet to come. I know in some cases, "to V" is equal to "ving", such
as the sentence: Seeing is believing or to see is to believe. But in
this case, I just don't know why the writer used "ving" to describe a
thing that is not yet to happen. Thanks.
Gloria
Eric Walker 寫道:
> > I just read another sentence which bothered me a lot. For your
> > reference, I just typed the whole paragraph.
[quoted text clipped - 46 lines]
> time, cause, manner, condition, concession, and so on; but sticking to
> the adjectival quality will be the easiest guide.)
> Then what is the difference between these two sentences.
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> to do, and it serves as an adverbial phrase to state a "thing that is
> not yet to happen."
"To get good grades" is not a future, but rather a timeless statement
of general applicability: compare "To fly, one must have wings." (Or
you could consider it elliptical for "To be able to fly &c.", where the
present-tense statement of a general or universal truth is more
obvious.)
> Then "getting up early" serves as an adjective phrase to mean something
> that happened.
That sentence is not sound as it stands, which may be the problem.
When the participle is in present-tense form, the following action
needs to be simultaneous: "Going into town, I met an old friend"--the
meeting took place during the going. In "Making the next moment my
own, I closed my eyes to still my quaking limbs," the eye-closing takes
place during the process of the speaker's making the moment his
(high-flown rhetoric, but technically sound).
When the action *follows* what is in the participial phrase, that
phrase needs to be in the past-tense form--something like "Having
gotten up early, I arrived at the office an hour ahead of time."
[What follows harks back to: "I chose neither of my first quick
solutions. Instead, I told myself only when I faced this unexpecrted
obstacle head-on could I be the victor. Making the next moment my own,
I closed my eyes to still my quaking limbs. I next forced out the hot
anxiety in my lungs to make room for what I intended to do."]
> So couldn't it be more logical if we use "to make" to replace "making"
> since "the moment my own" is not yet to come. I know in some cases,
> "to V" is equal to "ving", such as the sentence: Seeing is believing or
> to see is to believe. But in this case, I just don't know why the writer
> used "ving" to describe a thing that is not yet to happen.
He didn't. That's the point: the moment is question is not, as of the
instant he is describing, yet to come--it is happening. His "making"
and the eye-closing and limb-stilling are all simultaneous processes.
His use of "next" with moment is perhaps muddying the issue. Remember,
this is sequential narrative. The "next moment" means "the moment
coming right after the moment I just described". To make it dreadfully
basic:
1. I chose neither of my first quick solutions.
2. Instead, I told myself only when I faced this unexpecrted obstacle
head-on could I be the victor.
3. Making the next moment [after #2] my own, I closed my eyes &c.
There is nothing technically wrong with "To make the next moment my
own, I &c.", but it changes the sense of the statement from a
description of what happened to an explanation of why it happened.
More generally, in such participial adjectival phrases, the actual or
notional time (not the tense) of the related action needs to match that
of the phrase:
"Being sick, I went to bed." = "[While] being &c."
"Having finished my work, I went to bed." = "[After] having finished
&c."
"Relieved of my duties, I would have gone to bed." = "[If I had been]
relieved &c."
gloria0402@gmail.com - 11 Nov 2006 11:31 GMT
Hi
I am so glad that you make things so clear to me. Thanks for all the
help that you have offered.
Gloria
> > Then what is the difference between these two sentences.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 69 lines]
> "Relieved of my duties, I would have gone to bed." = "[If I had been]
> relieved &c."