Is it just the way it is?

The usual explanation is that, because only nouns (or pronouns) can be objects of prepositions, the only form of a verb that can be the object of preposition is a gerund.

But in the setence in question isn't the object of the preposition 'the latter', while the ing phrase is a participle modifying that?

Isn't this different from when the noun following the object is a possessive noun and the ing form is a gerund?

I think I would say that with acts more like a conjunction in this context. It introduces a participial phrase/clause.

with the latter being ...
_____________________________

Note how confusing your first question was, though:

You asked

Why are prepositions followed by ing verbs?

and then when you get an answer, you sa

Well, as a matter of fact the preposition in my sentence wasn't followed by an ing verb"


I don't think I said that. I just thought it was a participle, not a gerund.

I wanted to know why a preposition was followed by an ing verb, whether it be a participle or a gerund was irrelevent. Sorry, my questions are probably far from clear. I do try my best though

English 1b3I don't think I said that. I just thought it was a participle, not a gerund.

OK. Got it.

English 1b3It does look like a conjunction, since it doesn't appear to modify anything in the main clause and could easily be replaced by and, if being were changed to a finite verb.

Yes. That's the idea.

CJ