On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Roman Rausch <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>I concur with "converb"*. I think the Japanese "te"-form is considered >>a converb, and this sounds functionally similar. > > If it helps, the te-form is usually simply called 'gerund' or 'subordinative gerund' in scholarly works. I've never understood that. It's not nominal, so how can it be a gerund? > In language teaching, 'connective' is common (apart from 'te-form'). > But if the form in question is limited to introducing consecutive clauses, then 'consecutive' appears to be a suitable name for it.