Alexander Koryagin:   
      
   AK> Let's read a BASKERVILL& SEWELL's textbook; in what way   
   AK> the gerund differs from the the verbal noun.  IMHO there   
   AK> is something strange in the text, especially in the   
   AK> examples:   
   AK>   
   AK>   1.  The taking of means not to see another morning had   
   AK>       all day absorbed every energy;   
   AK>   
   AK>   2.  Our culture therefore must not omit the _arming_   
   AK>       of the man.   
   AK>   
   AK> Attention, they say -- the Gerund differs from the   
   AK> verbal noun in having the property of governing a noun   
   AK> (which the verbal noun has not).   
   AK>   
   AK> IMHO it means that the Gerund governs the next noun   
   AK> directly without a preposition.   
      
   No.  They say "govern", not "directly govern."  Whereas   
   someone takes the means, the verb "take" must needs govern   
   "means", indifferently of the way this relation is   
   expressed.   
      
   AK> As I understand it, a gerund (as a form of a verb) must   
   AK> take the same direct object as a pure verb. Examples:   
   AK>   
   AK> They loaded the ship.  (a pure verb)   
   AK> They started loading the ship. ( a gerund)   
      
   I agree that your second sentence has a gerund, but I also   
   insist that   
      
             The loading of this ship took two days.   
      
   has a gerund too, for the transitive verb "load" governs   
   "ship."  Note that the gerund of the form   
      
                        the V-ing of noun   
      
   is only possible with transitive verbs, which shows   
   unambiguously that the verb governs the noun, e.g. "the   
   barking of the dog" is not a gerund, while "the feeding of   
   that dog" is!   
      
   AK> PS: possession   
      
   Well-observed.   
      
   AK> "The taking of means not to see another morning had all   
   AK> day absorbed every energy." -- can you retell it in   
   AK> other words? Maybe we have here a kind of bad scanning?   
      
   That the correct sentence from "The Widow Werther" by   
   Maria Gowen Brooks.  She sought death before moring.   
      
   Can you answer my question from the previous post:   
   AS> Another way to look at it is that they are verbs in   
   AS> nouns' disguise.  For example, in "the production of   
   AS> cars" the noun "cars" is governed by the verb "produce".   
   AS> The preposition "of" denotes not posession but   
   AS> government, cf. "the tail of the cat."  The tail belongs   
   AS> to the cat, but production does not belong to cars.  In   
   AS> what terms do you explain this distinction if you don't   
   AS> accept mine?   
      
   ---   
    * Origin: *** nntp://fidonews.mine.nu *** Finland *** (2:221/6.0)