关于动名词的一个用法不解

亲亲号

1 G- U$ }. K4 Z' E
+ d. }/ P% `: n2 L动名词的形式有doing 和 having done，后者是完成式，用于发生在句子谓语动作之前的动作，
如That young man still denies having started the fire behind the store.
但由于start是短暂动词，这里如果只用现在分词的一般式也是正确的把？而且意义没有太大区别？
) |$ c- B8 k- w3 K1 ~5 x. PThat young man still denies starting the fire behind the store.
2 O% Q3 d! t1 H* e6 [
3 Q7 z# M: a7 Q2 d0 [. X类似还有这些句子
  m8 P- p# [0 b8 V5 Q5 uI repented shooting/having shot the bird
The man in the corner confessed to telling/having told a lie to the manager of the company.
The student denied cheating/having cheated on the exam.
% p  [3 B: z' O
! n; z7 q' d2 J6 c  P5 }* P请问这样理解是正确的么？

nullname

个人认为，楼主这些例子里面的 having+pp 形式是从句简化导致的变形。
3 [% e8 v$ h7 |
: Y# T2 s6 A7 _4 c即：That young man still denies having started the fire behind the store. 这句话跟动名词一点关系都没有。

我觉得上句应是下句的简化：
" Y' J# u9 {2 k. f1 T6 B, ]: qThat young man still denies that he had started the fire behind the store.

' X$ y6 E$ B, }- j% C% a4 f同理：
' `& G# [0 J+ @% |- p# }/ WI repented that I had shot the bird
- |7 \9 J: h" h简化为
I repented having shot the bird
" X- Z7 c! @3 N4 c4 i3 B
参考：语法俱乐部   旋元佑

pisgfa

8 R: _9 g) k& B. F) b& J- ?$ H
0 |2 W/ Q0 P# v$ q# S/ k两个句子都没问题，意思是一样的。having started 强调 放火发生在否认之前。
7 M" {5 o! _9 V4 s, o$ d6 c# H如果没有 supporting references 的话，推荐用 That young man still denies starting the fire behind the store. 更符合外国人习惯。
# m6 `3 j* P& [/ ^% c9 \, L9 j
7 [* l/ I, p/ g, n% XThat young man denied that he had started the fire before sunrise.

( V+ G5 S" Z! NThat young man still denies having started the fire before sundown.


9 G+ k$ [/ A0 o$ \* x

williamshein

个人同意三楼的解释，having done和doing都是可以作为动名词使用，但是语言的简化是因为用了doing不会产生误解，照样理解，并且这样还更简单，所以才简化成这样，至于楼主提到的start的短暂性，这里我觉得其实根本不需要考虑，因为不管短暂还是延续性都是发生在过去的，用having done都是为了强调发生的时间的先后顺序。用一些的初中、高中的例句来解释：I am sorry for interrupting (或having interrupted） you./ I remember locking (having locked) the door. 理解起来都是一样的。