Why is gerund not welcome here?

[Prower]

I was advised by a native speaker that in this sentence it is not good to use gerund

He came here for starting a business.

Instead, he said it would be ok to use infinitive.

He came here to start a business.

He didn't explain why it is so.

I thougt that there must be a connection with the verb "to come" which is not to take gerund after itself, however, I also doubt it because I have found examples with gerund

At the dinner, when the time came for talking, Sandy was called on...

The day came for going away.
_______________

What is the reason why it is not ok to use gerund here?

He came here for starting a business.

 

[Olli_T]

Oh dear.
I think that there is no good reason except that is the convention.

"He came here to start a business"
"He came here with the intention of starting a business."
"He came here and had the opportunity to start a business.
"He came here and had the opportunity of starting a business."
"When he came here the time was right to start a business."
"When he came here the time was right for starting a business."
are all fine, but
"He came here for starting a business." is not.
I can't really explain why but, trust me, the only time you would write that sentence is in a script where the speaker had not yet mastered English.
It is a perfect example of the kind of minor mistake that excellent non native speakers make.

 

[Olli_T]

You can say "coming" by the way.
its just that some people with dirty minds might giggle.

 

[Prower]

I can't really explain why but, trust me, the only time you would write that sentence is in a script where the speaker had not yet mastered English.
It is a perfect example of the kind of minor mistake that excellent non native speakers make.

Oops.... looks like there is no rational explanation. Very interesting! Thank you for the answer.

 

[entangledbank]

The other examples you found are not examples of this. The 'for' really belongs with the noun (day or time or some such): The time for talking is now; The day for going away has arrived; That's a good reason for going away. The 'for'-phrase can be moved after a short verb (The day came for going away), but they don't really contain a construction 'come for' + gerund-participle.

Your original example expresses purpose, and 'for' can be used for this with other verbs: Matches are used for lighting fires. It can even be used with 'come' if it takes an ordinary noun phrase: She came for a chat; He went outside for a cigarette. But for some unknown idiomatic reason, the construction 'came for starting' doesn't work.

 

[zapzap]

Actually, TO is the preposition normally used in a final clause before a verb in the so-called 'base form'. That's why, He came to start sounds perfectly 'normal'.
Bye

 

[Prower]

Actually, TO is the preposition normally used in a final clause before a verb in the so-called 'base form'. That's why, He came to start sounds perfectly 'normal'.
Bye

It is normal and I didn't question that.

 

[Thomas Tompion]

I think this is rather a difficult question. There's no problem with

He came to start a business - he came in order to start a business.

For starting a business, one should first do.... - one should first do... in order to start a business, but in this case the setting is general: in order to start a business means if one wants to start a business.

So I'd put forward this tentative view:

He came to do X is a simple clear normal way of saying that his purpose in coming was to do X.

For doing X, one should... is a way of explaining the general procedure for doing X. This isn't appropriate in the first example, because his coming isn't part of the general procedure for starting a business.

 

[zapzap]

I meant that it just follows the grammar rule prescribing FOR followed by a noun and TO followed by a verb in the base form: come for a drink/come to start.
Bye

 

[Er.S.M.M.Hanifa]

Hi,
1. I came for fishing.
2. I came for walking.
Do you consider the above two sentences wrong.
Please comment.
Thanks,.
Er.S.M.M.Hanifa

 

[JamesM]

I would change the first one to "I came for the fishing", meaning "I came here because I heard the fishing was good here" or, in another context, "my (only) purpose in coming was to fish".

The same change could be made to the second sentence.

As they are, though, they don't sound correct to me. I would say "I came to fish" or "I came to walk".

 

[Thomas Tompion]

Hi,
1. I came for fishing.
2. I came for walking.
Do you consider the above two sentences wrong.
Please comment.
Thanks,.
Er.S.M.M.Hanifa

Yes, I do, slightly, for the reasons I gave. You could say I came for the fishing, or the walking, but that is different.

Better to say I came to fish, or to walk.

For fishing, you need to wear warm clothes... is fine, of course.

 

[Prower]

I have come across this sentence:

1) The student gathered signatures for increasing the hours of the library.

And it reminds me of this one:

2) He came here for starting a business.

Is the first one correct? It is from this site http://www.grammaruntied.com/phrases/gerundP.html

 

[PaulQ]

There seems something vaguely wrong with your example, as if it were a sentence that would not be written, and this, despite it coming from an apparently reputable site.
A Google search for "for increasing the hours" shows 11,400 results: e.g. "This study makes ... a strong case ... for increasing the hours of nursing care," says author Jack Needleman,
and

to increase the hours shows 327,000 results."We object to the proposals to increase the hours for which charges apply in council car parks."

 

[laplace_]

Hi everybody,

I'm struggling with a similar case right now. I assume the sentence "The citizens are welcome to pay taxes" is correct while "The citizens are welcome paying taxes" is not. Right? Contrary to this I heard that it is ok to say "You are welcome asking questions after the lecture".
Could anyone please clear this up for me?

Thank you in advance and regards from Germany!

 

[JamesM]

"You are welcome asking questions" sounds odd to me. I would say "You are welcome to ask questions."

 

[Embonpoint]

I assume the sentence "The citizens are welcome to pay taxes" is correct while "The citizens are welcome paying taxes" is not. Right? Contrary to this I heard that it is ok to say "You are welcome asking questions after the lecture".
Could anyone please clear this up for me?

Thank you in advance and regards from Germany!

I would say, "You are welcome to ask questions after the lecture."

 

[Hermione Golightly]

Hi everybody,

........................."The citizens are welcome to pay taxes" is correct while "The citizens are welcome paying taxes" is not. Right? Contrary to this I heard that it is ok to say "You are welcome asking questions after the lecture".

Welcome to the forum laplace!

Please give us some sources. For example, 'I heard....' - where exactly did you hear or see?

The correct form is to say " You are welcome to ask questions after the lecture". Welcome is most often followed by to + infinitive or the preposition to + noun, for example, "You are welcome to my house".
To + verbal noun (- ing) might be possible I suppose (and "never say never"), but definitely not in this instance, after 'welcome'.



Hermione

 

[laplace_]

Thank you all for the fast answers.
I actually heard "You are welcome asking questions..." at the beginning of a lecture at university and it seemed to me that the speaker's English was very good.

Edit: And thanks for the warm "Welcome" Hermione

 

[Embonpoint]

Thank you all for the fast answers.
I actually heard "You are welcome asking questions..." at the beginning of a lecture at university and it seemed to me that the speaker's English was very good.

Perhaps the person misspoke? It is easy to do orally, when nervous and in front of many people. One might say "I don't mind your asking questions" and it's fairly easy in a high-pressure situation to start one sentence and finish another.

 

[brampton]

Under what conceivable circumstance would one say "welcome to pay taxes"?
This sounds like a genial invitation.

 

[laplace_]

Yes, maybe that was the problem. Those phonetic nuances can lead to a lot of confusion. But, at least, I finally got it and I won't welcome anybody doing something in the future
Thanks again.

Edit: @brampton I tried to translate a sentence that points out a kind of cynicism.
The whole translated sentence is: "Smokers are welcome paying to pay taxes but the government claims smoking to be the greatest imaginable sin on earth."