Re: Gerund question
What do you mean by 'indefinite language'?
It has in fact no existentials (notions related to [human] existence); therefore, there are mainly no works on existentialism in this language, and if any available, then they are all translated from other languages. Say, "go" does not imply "how", and you never know, whether "on foot" or "by car" [while studying a foreign language it's very important indeed]; or "being" implies a lot of things without distinguishing between the process of the being and things and beings themselves as if they were the same while most philosophies do claim they are not. So, at the both stages (basic, advanced) one is never certain about a lot of things in question.
This gives a reason for the
assignable indeterminacy of translation problem, (further on you are following the text of wiki) a thesis propounded by 20th century American
analytic philosopher W. V. Quine. The classic statement of this thesis can be found in his 1960 book
Word and Object, which gathered together and refined much of Quine's previous work on subjects other than formal logic and set theory. The indeterminacy of translation is also discussed at length in his
Ontological Relativity (1968). In these books, Quine considers the methods available to a field linguist attempting to translate a hitherto unknown language. He notes that there are always different ways one might break a sentence into words, and different ways to distribute functions among words. Any
hypothesis of
translation could be defended only by appeal to context, by determining what other sentences a native would utter. But the same
indeterminacy will appear there: any hypothesis can be defended if one adopts enough compensatory hypotheses about other parts of the language.
You can download a scientific article treating this problem here:
http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/9295/1/indeterm.pdf