Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I came across the following expression:

The primary task of many American troops in Baghdad has been to search for weapons and bands of pro-Hussein fighters still holding out.

This is from a newspaper called The Japan Times, which is published in Japan.

I don't understand the structure of the bold part.

  1. Is "holding out" a gerund?
  2. If so, is "pro-Hussein fighters" its semantic subject?
  3. Then, how is this sentence different from "weapons and bands which/that pro-Hussein fighters still hold out"?
share|improve this question
    
The rephrase would actually be 'for weapons, and for bands of pro-Hussein fighters still holding out'. –  TimLymington Sep 27 '12 at 9:34
add comment

2 Answers 2

To hold out here means ‘to maintain resistance, remain unsubdued; to continue, endure, persist, last.’ Holding out is the non-finite -ing form of the verb. A paraphrase would be ‘pro-Hussein fighters who continue to offer resistance.’

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you. But I want to know the grammatical structure of this sentence. I think that its underlying structure is "pro-Hussein fighters still hold out weapons and bands". If this sentence has the paraphrase as you suggest, what is the structure after "search for"? –  foolnloof Sep 27 '12 at 6:28
    
No, they are not holding out weapons and bands. ‘Hold out’ in this sense is intransitive. ‘Weapons and bands’ is the object of ‘search for’, post-modified by ‘of pro-Hussein fighters still holding out’. –  Barrie England Sep 27 '12 at 6:33
    
Thank you very much again. Is it possible to modify a noun (phrase) in the way like that? "-ing" is the (present) participle? What does this "of" mean? Is there any other example of this "of"? Is the structure "of + Semantic Subject + Participle"? –  foolnloof Sep 27 '12 at 6:43
    
Yes, it happens all the time. ‘Lots of people speaking’, ‘crowds of people cheering’, ‘teams of footballers playing’ . . . –  Barrie England Sep 27 '12 at 7:01
2  
. . . and a partridge in a pear tree. –  StoneyB Sep 27 '12 at 10:39
show 1 more comment

The boldfaced part is a noun phrase with a reduced relative clause. It's another case of Whiz-deletion. The original was something like

  • ... bands of pro-Hussein fighters who/which/that are still holding out.

where Whiz-deletion, as is its wont, deleted the boldfaced part -- the Wh-word subject of the relative clause, and the auxiliary be of the progressive construction that follows it. This is very normal behavior for English.

So, in order, the questions:

  1. Holding out is not a gerund; rather, it's what's left of the progressive construction after are got deleted, namely the present active participle (the -ing form) of the intransitive phrasal verb hold out.
  2. The subject of (are) holding out is who/which/that, which got deleted. This relative pronoun, however, is coreferential to its antecedent, pro-Hussein fighters, so it means the same. But the (deleted) relative pronoun is the real subject of the relative clause.
  3. This sentence is not different from a full, untransformed relative clause. It's just that English often deletes predictable syntactic markers to make things shorter; they mean the same and they work the same. Generally the full clauses are considered somewhat more formal, but not always.
share|improve this answer
    
Thank you very much! I got it. –  foolnloof Sep 27 '12 at 15:56
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.