The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

'Hand wounded' Vs. 'Wounded hand' (participles -ing and -ed forms) Options
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 9:03:11 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus,
I've read in Michael Swan's book: Interested, and interesting, excited, exciting, bored, boring, etc.
Interested, bored, excited et say how people feel.
Interesting, boring, etc describe the people or things that cause the feelings.
so, I've been asking if this can be applied for all the regular and irregular verbs regardless of if they are transitive, intransitive or both?

I think it can be applied to most transitive verbs that are applicable to feelings. For example:

Amused, surprised, startled, saddened, confused, baffled, annoyed, enlightened, amazed, astonished, gratified, pleased, charmed, enchanted, exhilarated, alarmed, frightened, disgusted, disappointed, shocked, exasperated, overwhelmed say how people feel.

Amusing, surprising, startling, saddening, confusing, baffling, annoying, enlightening, amazing, astonishing, gratifying, pleasing, charming, enchanting, exhilarating, alarming, frightening, disgusting, disappointing, shocking, exasperating, overwhelming describe the people or things that cause the feelings.

This can only be applied to transitive verbs, because the person/thing that causes the feeling is different from the person who has the feeling. For example, a thing amuses a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive.

There are some '-ing' adjectives that (for no particular reason) are used very little, or hardly ever - e.g. 'scaring' and 'angering' (but we commonly use 'scared' and 'angered'). (I cannot give you a full list of these exceptions - you can only learn them by experience.)
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 9:28:48 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator,

Some participles are specifically listed in dictionaries (as adjectives) because they are very common - e.g. interesting, boring, frightening, demanding, nourishing, horrifying, reassuring, satisfying, done, lost, broken, finished, spent, divided, abandoned, prepared (and many others). Large dictionaries obviously list more such words than smaller dictionaries.

[quote=Audiendus]
These common (adjectival) participles often function differently from participles used as verbs. For example, "frightening" used as a verb is transitive and needs a direct object:

This is frightening me.
He dressed as a ghost and ran around the room, frightening the children.


However, when used as an adjective, "frightening" does not have an object:

It was a frightening sight.
The sight was frightening.




Audiendus,

The same is also applied for 'past participle'
If a past participle is followed by 'by', then it is used as part of a passive verb. However, when used as an adjective, we prefer using other prepositions. Compare:
- She was frightened by a mouse that ran into the room.
She's always been terribly frightened of dying.
- The kids were so excited by the music that they kept screaming.
Joe's excited about the possibility of of going to the States.
- I was annoyed by the way she spoke to me.
I am annoyed with you.
"This is a good man" can be replaced by "This is a man who is good".
The broken window was replaced with a board

But there is some confusion when a past participle' is followed by other prepositions:
He was replaced at the party by his deputy, as he was ill.('replaced' is used as an adjective or part of a passive verb)
The broken window was replaced with a board by the janitor. ('replaced' is used as an adjective or part of a passive verb)
"In all my numbered sentences, 'exist' can be replaced with 'are', or vice versa [by us]" =>"In all my numbered sentences, we can can replace 'exist' with 'are', or vice versa"
"Any damaged things can be replaced with others [by us]."=>"We can replace any damaged things with others."
Your application must has been gone through the proper channels.'
I am faced by a problem understanding participles.
I am faced with a problem understanding participles.

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 12:11:29 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
The same is also applied for 'past participle'
If a past participle is followed by 'by', then it is used as part of a passive verb. However, when used as an adjective, we prefer using other prepositions. Compare:
- She was frightened by a mouse that ran into the room.
She's always been terribly frightened of dying.
- The kids were so excited by the music that they kept screaming.
Joe's excited about the possibility of of going to the States.
- I was annoyed by the way she spoke to me.
I am annoyed with you.
"This is a good man" can be replaced by "This is a man who is good".
The broken window was replaced with a board

But there is some confusion when a past participle' is followed by other prepositions:
He was replaced at the party by his deputy, as he was ill.('replaced' is used as an adjective or part of a passive verb)
The broken window was replaced with a board by the janitor. ('replaced' is used as an adjective or part of a passive verb)
"In all my numbered sentences, 'exist' can be replaced with 'are', or vice versa [by us]" =>"In all my numbered sentences, we can can replace 'exist' with 'are', or vice versa"
"Any damaged things can be replaced with others [by us]."=>"We can replace any damaged things with others."
Your application must has been gone through the proper channels.'
I am faced by a problem understanding participles.
I am faced with a problem understanding participles.


A past participle followed by 'by' or 'with' can be an adjective or part of a passive verb. As I have pointed out before, you need to consider the meaning of the participle: does it refer to an action or a state? If it refers to an action, it is part of a passive verb; if it refers to a state, it is an adjective. (Sometimes it could be either.)
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 1:10:01 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator,

I will not reply in detail to all your latest questions about adjectival participles.

There is often no clear distinction between a verbal participle and an adjectival participle. It is impossible to categorize all participles as one or the other.

Audiendus,

Michael Sawan only said these phrases below with the alternatives in the brackets.
an escaped lion (= a lion which has escaped) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a broken heart (= a heart which has been broken) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a forgotten person (= a person who has been forgotten by everyone) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
falling leaves (= leaves which fall) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a meat-eating animal (= an animal which eats meat') from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle

With the same concept, I have written these phrases with the alternatives in the brackets.
intransitive active adjectival present participle:
escaped lion (= a lion which has escaped) from the alternative, it seems a verbal participle
improved grades (= grades which have improved) - from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle.

transitive passive adjectival past participle:
an improved system (= a system which is/was/has been improved) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a lost dog = (a dog which is/was/has been lost) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle

intransitive active adjectival present participle:
falling leaves (= leaves which fall) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a preceding page = (a page which precedes) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
streaming children (= children who stream) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
an existing ambassador (= an ambassador who is existing NOT = an ambassador who exists) from the alternative, it seems to be an adjectival participle
an interesting book (= a book which is interesting NOT = a book which interests) an ambassador who exists) from the alternative, it seems to be an adjectival participle





Firstly Having seen the alternatives above, I only saw that only 'existing' and 'interesting' are used as adjectival participle since their alternatives are 'an ambassador who is existing' and 'a book which is interesting.'. However, if their alternatives were as follows 'an ambassador who exists', 'a book which interests.', then they would be verbal participles.


Secondly: I have a problem analysing "a bored person" /"an interested person"/ "excited kids". However, I don't have a problem with 'a person is bored' or 'a person is interested in a book.' or 'kids are excited.' . My analyzing problem is as long as ' broken heart = a heart which has been broken', and 'a forgotten person= a person who has been forgotten by everyone', I am wondering why "a bored person" Not = "a person who is/was/has been bored.", "an interested person" NOT = "a person who is/was/has been interested.", and "excited kids" NOT = "kids who are/were/have been excited".






Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 2:04:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
Note that some dictionaries list 'spent' as an adjective:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/spent



1- But, 'spending' is not listed as an adjective. So, Spending time/money. It was spending time/money. well-spending money/time.

2- When 'spent' is listed as an adjective, then it means it can be an active adjectival past participl or passive adjectival past participle. I am right, ain't I?

3- I think Michael Swan means with the term of 'past participles which are used with active meanings or with passive meaning' only with the past participles which usually come before nouns, and not come after 'to be'.


4- So, there is still some confusion in the term of the past participle used as 'a passive adjectival past participle' and as part of a passive verb. Or they are the same?

5- I know a rule saying "When a past participle is used as part of a passive verb, then we can put 'much' or 'very much' before it, but not 'very'. However, when it is used as an adjective, then we prefer 'very'. There are some exceptions.(He's (very) much mistaken. He's well-known in the art world).". However, if there is no 'much' or 'very' before past participle, how can I know that past participle is used as an adjective or part of a passive verb. So, 'spent' is here used as adjective or part of a passive verb.
This is well-spent money.
This is a well-spent time.
It's well-spent money.
It's a well-spent time.

I don't think if I can say 'spent money/time' or 'It is spent money' without an adverb 'well, much, very' before it.
By the time we had done half of the job we were all spent.

6- I read in Michael Swan's book that some more past participle can be used with active meanings, but only with adverbs.
Examples: (NOTE I, myself, wrote the blue alternatives in the brackets)
a well-read person. NOT a read person (= a person who read/has read well, NOT = a person who is/was/has been read well
a just-arrived train NOT an arrived train) (= a train which just arrived/has just arrived, NOT = a train which is/was/has been just arrived)
a much-travelled man (= a man who travelled much or has/had travelled much, NOT = a man who is/was/has been travelled much)
recently-arrived immigrants (= immigrants who arrived/have arrived recently, NOT = immigrants who are/were/have been arrived recently
The train just arrived at platform six is the delayed 13.15 from Hereford. (This is the one I cannot understand since there are two finite verbs and only one subject.So, it seems to read as 'The train which just arrived at platform six is the delayed 13.15 from Hereford.)
Some active past participles can be used after 'to be'
She is retired now. [She was retired 8 years ago, She's been retired for 8 years/since 2010]
Those curtains are badly faded.
This class is the most advanced.
My family are all grown up now.
Recovered, camped, stopped, finished, and gone are used in this way after 'to be', but not usually before nouns.
Why are those cars stopped at the crossroads?(NOT a stopped car)


Based on the above rule in # 6, my questions are:
1- How can I know if a past participle can be used before nouns and after 'to be' as well, such as 'retired', 'faded', advanced('an advanced student', 'an advanced class', 'this class is advanced') 'grown up', or only after 'to be', such as 'Recovered, camped, stopped, finished, and gone, etc?

2- I don't know if the past participle 'faded' can come either in the group 'active adjectival past participle without adverbs', as in 'faded curtains'(=curtains which have faded due to the sun, NOT curtains which are/were/have been faded due to the sun) , 'Those curtains are/were/have faded due to the sun', OR in 'active adjectival past participle with adverbs' as 'badly faded curtains'=(curtains which have badly faded, NOT curtains which are/were/have been badly faded), Those curtains are/were badly faded', OR to the passive adjectival past participle without adverbs, as in 'faded curtains (= curtains which are/were/have been faded by the sun), or to the passive adjectival past participle with adverbs, as in 'badly-faded curtains (=curtains which are/were/have been badly faded by the sun?


3- I don't know if 'well-spent' can also come the four categories like 'faded', or just in the passive adjectival past participle
it is well-spent time/money = time/money which is/is being spent well.
it was well-spent time/money = time/money which was/was being/has been spent well.



Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
thar
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 4:16:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 18,915
Neurons: 76,555
Experience.


That is not the answer you are looking for - but you have to pick it up, just like every other person learning a human language.


I advise you to spend more time with the actual language rather than with the manuals that describe the intricacies of the language.


A grammar book describes the language as best it can. It is not an instruction manual like a Python textbook. You are trying to make sentences that no native would say, so this is not time useful!y spent.

I know this has been said before, many times. But I want to say it again because I want your effort to be rewarded, not hold you back.
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 10:35:54 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus,

Michael Sawan only said these phrases below with the alternatives in the brackets.
an escaped lion (= a lion which has escaped) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a broken heart (= a heart which has been broken) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a forgotten person (= a person who has been forgotten by everyone) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
falling leaves (= leaves which fall) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a meat-eating animal (= an animal which eats meat') from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle

With the same concept, I have written these phrases with the alternatives in the brackets.
intransitive active adjectival present participle:
escaped lion (= a lion which has escaped) from the alternative, it seems a verbal participle
improved grades (= grades which have improved) - from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle.

transitive passive adjectival past participle:
an improved system (= a system which is/was/has been improved) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a lost dog = (a dog which is/was/has been lost) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle

intransitive active adjectival present participle:
falling leaves (= leaves which fall) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
a preceding page = (a page which precedes) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
streaming children (= children who stream) from the alternative, it seems to be a verbal participle
an existing ambassador (= an ambassador who is existing NOT = an ambassador who exists) from the alternative, it seems to be an adjectival participle
an interesting book (= a book which is interesting NOT = a book which interests) an ambassador who exists) from the alternative, it seems to be an adjectival participle

The meanings of these sentences are given in brackets above, and that is all you need to know. Trying to categorize them all into adjectival or verbal participles is a waste of time.

"Children who stream" is incorrect. Children are streamed (by a school), i.e. they are placed in different classes according to their ability.



Firstly Having seen the alternatives above, I only saw that only 'existing' and 'interesting' are used as adjectival participle since their alternatives are 'an ambassador who is existing' and 'a book which is interesting.'. However, if their alternatives were as follows 'an ambassador who exists', 'a book which interests.', then they would be verbal participles.

Secondly: I have a problem analysing "a bored person" /"an interested person"/ "excited kids". However, I don't have a problem with 'a person is bored' or 'a person is interested in a book.' or 'kids are excited.' . My analyzing problem is as long as ' broken heart = a heart which has been broken', and 'a forgotten person= a person who has been forgotten by everyone', I am wondering why "a bored person" Not = "a person who is/was/has been bored.", "an interested person" NOT = "a person who is/was/has been interested.", and "excited kids" NOT = "kids who are/were/have been excited".
As I have said before, "a ____ed person" means the same as "a person who is ____ed". In the first case, the "____ed" word is an adjective; in the second case, the "____ed" word is either an adjective (if it refers to a state) or part of a passive verb (if it refers to an action). So "a bored person" can be replaced with "a person who is bored" (i.e. in a bored state, so "bored" is an adjective), and "an interested person" can be replaced with "a person who is interested" (i.e. in an interested state, so "interested" is an adjective).
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 10:48:39 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
2- When 'spent' is listed as an adjective, then it means it can be an active adjectival past participle or passive adjectival past participle. I am right, ain't I?

Passive adjectival past participle. It does not work as an active participle:.

The lion has escaped. [active]
The bridge has collapsed. [active]
The money has spent.

If you want to know whether an adjectival past participle is active or passive, consider its meaning.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 4:13:08 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus,
Could you please just check out where the wrong points are?

1- Nikki Haley, the existing U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, issued a harsh assessment of UNESCO on Tuesday, one day after the United States and Israel officially quit the U.N. agency, alleging an anti-Israel bias. (......the current/present U.S. ambassador who exists to the United Nations...) [Look up this meaning of "existing" in a dictionary]


Audiendus
While looking the word "remaining" up, in the Longman dictionary, it listed it as an adjective only used before noun. However, I saw, in the Oxford Wordpower, which didn't list 'remaining' as an adjective, the examples, under the root definition of the verb "remain", in the first of which "remaining" is used before noun "They spent the two remaining days of their holidays buying presents to take home.". And in the second after noun, "Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining.
Some other times, I see 2 files remaining while uploading files or downloading.

Firstly: so, is the "remaining" used after nouns part of present progressive /intransitive active verbal present participle/present participle. However, the "remaining" used before nouns is an adjectival present participle(adjective)?

As a result,
Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining (=.... of the match which remains)
2 files remaining(= 2 files which remain)

secondly: why is "existing" not used in this way "remaining" is used?

Thirdly: do you know any way helping me detect if a participle adjective or even original adjectives can be used in either position, attributive(before noun), post-positive(after noun) or predictive?

fourthly: in, 'Carrier data accounting may differ from your device.', "accounting" is an adjective or a reduced relative clause( = Carrier data which accounts may differ from your device.


Finally: do you know other words used in this way "remaining" is used?
I listed "embarrassing", "tempting", "terrifying", "living", "dying", "loading", "reclining", etc can be used in this way "remaining" is used.

an embarrassing situation.
a situation embarrassing.

a tempting offer.
Any adds tempting people are prohibited here.

He has no living relatives.
He has no relatives living

a dying girl.
You should be praying to your dying day.
This is a/the girl dying for a cup of tea.

The hostage suffered a terrifying ordeal.
The hostage suffered an ordeal terrifying.


"loading": the maximum loading weight is 99 Ibs.
The maximum weight loading is....

The car has reclining seats at the front.
a girl reclining on a deck chair.


There was a smoking cigarette end in the ashtray.
There was a house smoking.


a lighting attack.
There was an attack lighting.


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 9:41:33 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Firstly: so, is the "remaining" used after nouns part of present progressive /intransitive active verbal present participle/present participle. However, the "remaining" used before nouns is an adjectival present participle(adjective)? Yes.

As a result,
Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining (=.... of the match which remains)
It is the minutes, not the match, which remain.
We discussed this "with + noun + participle" construction in one of your other threads. It means "in a/the situation in which..."
Tottenham scored in the situation in which five minutes of the match remained.
Does Michael Swan mention this construction? See if you can find a reference to it in his book or elsewhere.


2 files remaining(= 2 files which remain) Yes. "There are 2 files remaining" = There are 2 files which remain.

secondly: why is "existing" not used in this way "remaining" is used? It is used in the same way:
There are (now) no dodos existing.
There are no dodos remaining.


Thirdly: do you know any way helping me detect if a participle adjective or even original adjectives can be used in either position, attributive(before noun), post-positive(after noun) or predicative? I do not know any general rule for this.

fourthly: in, 'Carrier data accounting may differ from your device.', "accounting" is an adjective or a reduced relative clause( = Carrier data which accounts may differ from your device. No, I think it is a gerund (functioning as a noun). That seems to be the only way in which it makes sense.

Finally: do you know other words used in this way "remaining" is used?
I listed "embarrassing", "tempting", "terrifying", "living", "dying", "loading", "reclining", etc can be used in this way "remaining" is used. I have deleted the sentences that cannot be used. A participle after a noun is normally verbal (see the first paragraph of this post), and a verbal participle often sounds incomplete on its own (see the "embarrassing" and "terrifying" examples below).

an embarrassing situation.
a situation embarrassing.
a situation embarrassing us all.

a tempting offer.
Any ads tempting people are prohibited here.

He has no living relatives.
He has no relatives living

a dying girl.
You should be praying to your dying day.
This is a/the girl dying for a cup of tea.

The hostage suffered a terrifying ordeal.
The hostage suffered an ordeal terrifying.
The hostage suffered an ordeal terrifying him.

"loading": the maximum loading weight is 99 lbs. This is a different construction. "Loading" here is a gerund (basically functioning as a noun, but here used attributively as an adjective). It is not a participle, because "loading" is not something that the weight does.
The maximum weight loading is....

The car has reclining seats at the front.
a girl reclining on a deck chair.

There was a smoking cigarette end in the ashtray.
There was a house smoking.

a lighting attack.
There was an attack lighting.
This should be "lightning", which is an original noun.
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, January 10, 2019 7:54:34 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Firstly: so, is the "remaining" used after nouns part of present progressive /intransitive active verbal present participle/present participle. However, the "remaining" used before nouns is an adjectival present participle(adjective)? Yes.

As a result,
Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining (=.... of the match which remains)
It is the minutes, not the match, which remain.
We discussed this "with + noun + participle" construction in one of your other threads. It means "in a/the situation in which..."
Tottenham scored in the situation in which five minutes of the match remained.
Does Michael Swan mention this construction? See if you can find a reference to it in his book or elsewhere.


2 files remaining(= 2 files which remain) Yes. "There are 2 files remaining" = There are 2 files which remain.

secondly: why is "existing" not used in this way "remaining" is used? It is used in the same way:
There are (now) no dodos existing.
There are no dodos remaining.



Thank you so much indeed,
First of all, do you think 'varying' can be used in this way 'remaining' and 'existing' are used?
varying degrees of success.
Unlike some other languages that I speak daily (with varying degrees of authenticity), English long ago did away with the singular informal forms of 'you': thou, thee, thy/thine and the plural/formal singular ye.
There are many questions varying.
We offer launch varying (= lunch which varies)

Secondly: I see the words coming after nouns regardless of these words are originally adjectives, adjectival participles, or verbal participle have the constructions like the reduced relative clauses. Does this always happen in general? E.g, ( "There are no(now) dodos existing = ....dodos which exist", "There are two files remaining = there are two files which remain", "There are many questions varying = ....questions which vary", et cetera...et cetera)

Thirdly: I really see 'vary' can be used intransitively and transitively. So, it is still used in this way 'remaining' and 'existing' are used regardless if it is used an intransitive or transitive verb.

Fourtly: I now saw that you judged that 'remaining', 'existing' (and 'varying' may also be so) used before nouns are adjectives(adjectival present participles), however, the verbal participles 'remaining', 'existing', (and 'varying' may also be so) can never come before nouns. If my understanding was correct, then all the present participles of all verbs can never be used before nouns, and if I saw a word in the form of the present participle of a verb used before a noun, then it would be called the adjectival present participle of that word, and not verbal present participle. My understanding was wrong, then could you give me words whose verbal present participles are used before nouns?

Finally: Michael Swan only mentioned these below: (look at the screen shots below)
"With Peter working in Birmingham, and lucky travelling most of the week, the house seems pretty much." I don't think it is the same construction you said is used in my sentence 'Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining'




Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, January 10, 2019 8:45:19 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
First of all, do you think 'varying' can be used in this way 'remaining' and 'existing' are used? No.
varying degrees of success.
Unlike some other languages that I speak daily (with varying degrees of authenticity), English long ago did away with the singular informal forms of 'you': thou, thee, thy/thine and the plural/formal singular ye.
There are many questions varying.
We offer launch varying They sound wrong. (I cannot give you a logical reason why 'existing' and 'remaining' can be used like this but not 'varying'; it is just the way English is used. And I cannot give you a list of participles (like 'existing' and 'remaining') that can be used intransitively after a noun.)

Secondly: I see the words coming after nouns regardless of these words are originally adjectives, adjectival participles, or verbal participle have the constructions like the reduced relative clauses. Does this always happen in general? Yes, I think so.

Thirdly: I really see 'vary' can be used intransitively and transitively. So, it is still used in this way 'remaining' and 'existing' are used regardless if it is used an intransitive or transitive verb. 'Varying' can be used in this way if it is transitive, e.g:
"There are many factors varying the speed and direction of the wind." [= There are many factors which vary the speed and direction of the wind.]


Fourthly: I now saw that you judged that 'remaining', 'existing' (and 'varying' may also be so) used before nouns are adjectives(adjectival present participles), however, the verbal participles 'remaining', 'existing', (and 'varying' may also be so) can never come before nouns. If my understanding was correct, then all the present participles of all verbs can never be used before nouns, and if I saw a word in the form of the present participle of a verb used before a noun, then it would be called the adjectival present participle of that word, and not verbal present participle. Yes, I think that is correct.

Finally: Michael Swan only mentioned these below: (look at the screen shots below)
"With Peter working in Birmingham, and lucky travelling most of the week, the house seems pretty much." I don't think it is the same construction you said is used in my sentence 'Tottenham scored with five minutes of the match remaining' Grammatically, it is the same construction. The only difference is that the clause "With Peter working in Birmingham..." gives the reason that the house seems pretty much, whereas the clause "with five minutes of the match remaining" (which could be moved to the beginning of the sentence) gives the time that Tottenham scored.
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 7:12:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
2- When 'spent' is listed as an adjective, then it means it can be an active adjectival past participle or passive adjectival past participle. I am right, ain't I?

Passive adjectival past participle. It does not work as an active participle:.

The lion has escaped. [active]
The bridge has collapsed. [active]
The money has spent.

If you want to know whether an adjectival past participle is active or passive, consider its meaning.


Audiendus, I had to consider the meaning in the sentences below since I don't have any agent(the one doing the action), nor a preposition introducing the agent. I only know a past participle is used as part of a passive verb if there is at least an existing preposition(by, with, through, etc) introducing the agent. So, the first past participle is part of a passive verb, but the other ones are used as adjectival past participles, I think. But nevertheless, do you think that that really make very much difference if past participle is used as part of passive verb or an adjective?

The Palestinian was rushed to the hospital where he died of his wounds.
If you are shortlisted to interview for a Chevening Award, you will be invited to attend an interview in the city where the British embassy or high commission has a representation.
Applicants are allowed to insert quotations but must acknowledge the source as they would in an academic essay.


Secondly: where is the preposition introducing the agent here in this passive form below?

As a result of these errors, applications are deemed ineligible and applicants are not taken through to the next stage of the competition.

Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others?
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application.
Teachers will never be replaced by computers in the classroom." => computers will never replace teachers in the classroom.
The broken window was replaced with a board by the janitor. => the janitor replaced the broken window with a board


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, February 16, 2019 5:59:21 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus, could you please confirm these final points of mine below?
I had to copy and paste them again to let them be highlighted again.

Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
2- When 'spent' is listed as an adjective, then it means it can be an active adjectival past participle or passive adjectival past participle. I am right, ain't I?

Passive adjectival past participle. It does not work as an active participle:.

The lion has escaped. [active]
The bridge has collapsed. [active]
The money has spent.

If you want to know whether an adjectival past participle is active or passive, consider its meaning.


Audiendus, I had to consider the meaning in the sentences below since I don't have any agent(the one doing the action), nor a preposition introducing the agent. I only know a past participle is used as part of a passive verb if there is at least an existing preposition(by, with, through, etc) introducing the agent. So, the first past participle is part of a passive verb, but the other ones are used as adjectival past participles, I think. But nevertheless, do you think that that really makes very much difference if past participle is used as part of passive verb or an adjective?

The Palestinian was rushed to the hospital where he died of his wounds.
If you are shortlisted to interview for a Chevening Award, you will be invited to attend an interview in the city where the British embassy or high commission has a representation.
Applicants are allowed to insert quotations but must acknowledge the source as they would in an academic essay.


Secondly: where is the preposition introducing the agent here in this passive form below?

As a result of these errors, applications are deemed ineligible and applicants are not taken through to the next stage of the competition.

Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others?
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application.
Teachers will never be replaced by computers in the classroom." => computers will never replace teachers in the classroom.
The broken window was replaced with a board by the janitor. => the janitor replaced the broken window with a board


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Saturday, February 16, 2019 10:53:14 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus, I had to consider the meaning in the sentences below since I don't have any agent(the one doing the action), nor a preposition introducing the agent. I only know a past participle is used as part of a passive verb if there is at least an existing preposition(by, with, through, etc) introducing the agent.

With a passive verb, the agent does not need to be specifically mentioned - it only needs to be implied. For example:

I was stopped in the street. [This implies "by someone", but "stopped" is still part of a passive verb even if we do not add "by someone". The meaning makes clear that it is passive.]

The car has been sold. [We do not need to add "by someone", although these words are implied.]

A cooperator wrote:
So, the first past participle is part of a passive verb, but the other ones are used as adjectival past participles, I think. But nevertheless, do you think that that really makes very much difference if past participle is used as part of passive verb or an adjective?

The Palestinian was rushed to the hospital where he died of his wounds. Yes, "rushed" is part of a passive verb, but there is no agent mentioned here.
If you are shortlisted to interview for a Chevening Award, you will be invited to attend an interview in the city where the British embassy or high commission has a representation. "Shortlisted" could be regarded either as part of a passive verb or as an adjective.
Applicants are allowed to insert quotations but must acknowledge the source as they would in an academic essay. "Allowed" could be either.


Secondly: where is the preposition introducing the agent here in this passive form below?

As a result of these errors, applications are deemed ineligible and applicants are not taken through to the next stage of the competition.

There is no preposition because no agent is mentioned, but an agent (or agents) is implied, e.g. "the judg(es)" or "the administrator(s)".

A cooperator wrote:
Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others? No.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application. "Through" is not a preposition here - it is part of the verb phrase "gone through". The preposition "by" is needed: "Your application must be gone through by..." [someone/something]
Teachers will never be replaced by computers in the classroom." => computers will never replace teachers in the classroom.
The broken window was replaced with a board by the janitor. => the janitor replaced the broken window with a board
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 5:12:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus,
I've read in Michael Swan's book: Interested, and interesting, excited, exciting, bored, boring, etc.
Interested, bored, excited et say how people feel.
Interesting, boring, etc describe the people or things that cause the feelings.
so, I've been asking if this can be applied for all the regular and irregular verbs regardless of if they are transitive, intransitive or both?

I think it can be applied to most transitive verbs that are applicable to feelings. For example:

Amused, surprised, startled, saddened, confused, baffled, annoyed, enlightened, amazed, astonished, gratified, pleased, charmed, enchanted, exhilarated, alarmed, frightened, disgusted, disappointed, shocked, exasperated, overwhelmed say how people feel.

Amusing, surprising, startling, saddening, confusing, baffling, annoying, enlightening, amazing, astonishing, gratifying, pleasing, charming, enchanting, exhilarating, alarming, frightening, disgusting, disappointing, shocking, exasperating, overwhelming describe the people or things that cause the feelings.

This can only be applied to transitive verbs, because the person/thing that causes the feeling is different from the person who has the feeling. For example, a thing amuses a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive.

There are some '-ing' adjectives that (for no particular reason) are used very little, or hardly ever - e.g. 'scaring' and 'angering' (but we commonly use 'scared' and 'angered'). (I cannot give you a full list of these exceptions - you can only learn them by experience.)


Audiendus,

Having said 'there are some '-ing' adjectives that (for no particular reason) are used very little, or hardly ever - e.g. 'scaring' and 'angering'.....', I am asking what difference there is between 'scaring/scared', 'angering/angered' and the list of 'amusing/amused, surprising/surprised and so forth.... mentioned directly above the very bottom part of your post.

I've looked up 'anger' and 'scary' in my Longman dictionary , and I found both of them are transitive verbs. Also, the dictionary didn't say 'scaring', 'angering/angered' are listed as adjectives. But, I only found 'scared' is listed as an adjective.

On the other hand, I looked up the 'amuse', surprise, etc in my dictionary, I found all of them are transitive verbs. Also, the dictionary say 'amusing/amused, surprising/surprised etc are listed as adjectives.


Let me take 'amuse' as you said "For example, a thing amuses a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive."
Also, I can use 'scare/anger' like the way above.
For example, a thing scares/angers a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive.
Also, as long as I can say 'I am so amused/so bored', 'This party is so amusing/so boring', and 'It was amusing/boring party', I can also say 'I am so scared/so angered', 'This story is so scaring/so angering.', and 'It was scaring/angering party'.

As a result, why did you mention in the very bottom part of your post there are exceptions when mentioning 'scaring/angering/scared and angered?



Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 8:46:10 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Let me take 'amuse' as you said "For example, a thing amuses a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive."
Also, I can use 'scare/anger' like the way above.
For example, a thing scares/angers a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive.
Also, as long as I can say 'I am so amused/so bored', 'This party is so amusing/so boring', and 'It was amusing/boring party', I can also say 'I am so scared/so angered', 'This story is so scaring/so angering.', and 'It was scaring/angering party'.

You can say whatever you wish, but native speakers hardly ever say 'scaring' or 'angering'. (They do say 'scary'.)

Don't ask me why! It is just the way the language is used.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 7:23:49 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Let me take 'amuse' as you said "For example, a thing amuses a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive."
Also, I can use 'scare/anger' like the way above.
For example, a thing scares/angers a person. There is a subject and an object, so the verb must be transitive.
Also, as long as I can say 'I am so amused/so bored', 'This party is so amusing/so boring', and 'It was amusing/boring party', I can also say 'I am so scared/so angered', 'This story is so scaring/so angering.', and 'It was scaring/angering party'.

You can say whatever you wish, but native speakers hardly ever say 'scaring' or 'angering'. (They do say 'scary'.)

Don't ask me why! It is just the way the language is used.

Yes,
But,
"scary" NOT scaring and "scared"
"angry" NOT angering and "angered"
I am scary/angry (describe the people or things that cause the feelings.)
I am scared/angered .(say how people feel)
If not, then
If I want to use "scare" or "anger" as an adjective describing the people or things that cause the feelings, which derived word of "scare" /"anger" must I use?
I am bored. (say how people feel)
It is boring. (describe the people or things that cause the feelings.)





Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
BobShilling
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:01:03 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 680
Neurons: 4,357
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
A cooperator wrote:
"scary" NOT scaring and "scared"
"angry" NOT angering and "angered"
I am scary/angry (describe the people or things that cause the feelings.)
I am scared/angered .(say how people feel)

I am scary means that I scare people.
I am angry is about my mood.
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:02:28 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
If someone scares you, you are scared (or frightened).
If you scare someone, you are scary (or frightening).

If someone angers you, you are angered (or angry).

'Angering' is not normally used as an adjective, so if you anger someone, you need to use a synonym, e.g. you are vexing, infuriating, annoying, exasperating etc.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:39:17 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
If someone scares you, you are scared (or frightened).
If you scare someone, you are scary (or frightening).

If someone angers you, you are angered (or angry).

'Angering' is not normally used as an adjective, so if you anger someone, you need to use a synonym, e.g. you are vexing, infuriating, annoying, exasperating etc.

Thanks a lot, Audiendus and Bob Shilling,
Here is the question which is how I do get the full list of these exceptions.
I've not known that usage for "scared" Vs. "scary" and "angry/angered" Vs. "vexing, infuriating, annoying, exasperation", but after you had told me.
You said the statement below before, but at least can you give three or four more words of expectations and I will look them up by myself and see if I can work their usage out as you did with the "angered/scared"
"There are some '-ing' adjectives that (for no particular reason) are used very little, or hardly ever - e.g. 'scaring' and 'angering' (but we commonly use 'scared' and 'angered'). (I cannot give you a full list of these exceptions - you can only learn them by experience.)"


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:56:04 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
I am sorry, but there is nothing more that I can usefully add. If there is a particular '-ing' word that you wish to use, but have not specifically seen or heard, check a large dictionary to find out whether it is used.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 9:16:57 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
I am sorry, but there is nothing more that I can usefully add. If there is a particular '-ing' word that you wish to use, but have not specifically seen or heard, check a large dictionary to find out whether it is used.

As long as I was expecting that all "-ing" adjectives are used to describe the people or things that cause the feelings and all "-ed" adjectives are used to say how people feel), I mean to give two more words which are used like: "scary" which can be used to to describe the people or things that cause the feeling, and "scared" and "angry/angered" which can be used to say how people feel.


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:14:59 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:

A cooperator wrote:
Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others? No.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application. "Through" is not a preposition here - it is part of the verb phrase "gone through". The preposition "by" is needed: "Your application must be gone through by..." [someone/something]

1. You said that you don't know other prepositions used to introduce the agent.
"in" Vs. "by"
The snow covers the hill. It can be made into the passive as: the hills are covered in/by snow.
Paint covered the children. I can make it into the passive as "The children were covered in/by paint.

2. You considered "with" one of prepositions which is used after passive verbs to introduce the agent. But, I am confused if "with" is here just one of the prepositions used after past participles which are used like adjectives or one of the prepositions used to introduce the agent.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
The room was filled with thick smokes. => Thick smokes filled the room.

3. You said "through" is a preposition a part of the idiomatic phrasal verb "go + through". So, "by" is needed to introduce the agent if we want to.
Someone/something went through my room. => My room was went through by someone/something.

Do you think even "by" is needed to introduce the agent if the "through" is an independent preposition of the unidiomatic phrasal verb "go through"?
A car went through a puddle and covered me with mud. => A puddle was went through by a car.
They ran through the gate. => The gate was ran through by them.

If "through" was not a preposition introducing the agent in the two examples just above, could you give me an example when "through" is used after a passive verb to introduce the agent?


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, February 28, 2019 8:37:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,581
Neurons: 999,312
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator,

I have responded to you more than 30 times in this thread over the past three months. I do not wish to engage in endless discussion on the same topic. I have nothing further to say in this thread. I will leave it to others to comment if they wish.
A cooperator
Posted: Friday, March 1, 2019 9:47:39 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator,

I have responded to you more than 30 times in this thread over the past three months. I do not wish to engage in endless discussion on the same topic. I have nothing further to say in this thread. I will leave it to others to comment if they wish.

Audiendus,
I much appreciate your precious time spent helping me.
I am respectfully requesting you to answer those three questions even with outlining notes.


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
palapaguy
Posted: Friday, March 1, 2019 11:35:33 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 1,423
Neurons: 12,121
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator,

I have responded to you more than 30 times in this thread over the past three months. I do not wish to engage in endless discussion on the same topic. I have nothing further to say in this thread. I will leave it to others to comment if they wish.

Audiendus,
I much appreciate your precious time spent helping me.
I am respectfully requesting you to answer those three questions even with outlining notes.

Hi again, Coop.
There are many paid online English-learning sites where you can receive excellent face-to-face instruction. One such site is linked below. However, you have never responded to my suggestions in the past. Why not?

https://preply.com/en/skype/tutors-american-english
A cooperator
Posted: Friday, March 1, 2019 12:02:28 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
palapaguy wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator,

I have responded to you more than 30 times in this thread over the past three months. I do not wish to engage in endless discussion on the same topic. I have nothing further to say in this thread. I will leave it to others to comment if they wish.

Audiendus,
I much appreciate your precious time spent helping me.
I am respectfully requesting you to answer those three questions even with outlining notes.

Hi again, Coop.
There are many paid online English-learning sites where you can receive excellent face-to-face instruction. One such site is linked below. However, you have never responded to my suggestions in the past. Why not?

https://preply.com/en/skype/tutors-american-english

Hello back, Plapaguy,
I've really tried contacting their customer service, but I felt as though teaching English through Skype would require a high-speed internet connection. I have ADSL subscription with an overall speed of 512 kbps, which is too far low to establish a phone call via Skype.

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
palapaguy
Posted: Saturday, March 2, 2019 2:34:18 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 1,423
Neurons: 12,121
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
Palapaguy wrote:

There are many paid online English-learning sites where you can receive excellent face-to-face instruction. One such site is linked below. However, you have never responded to my suggestions in the past. Why not?

https://preply.com/en/skype/tutors-american-english

Hello back, Plapaguy,
I've really tried contacting their customer service, but I felt as though teaching English through Skype would require a high-speed internet connection. I have ADSL subscription with an overall speed of 512 kbps, which is too far low to establish a phone call via Skype. [/quote]

Coop, if you contacted Skype's customer service, you would know that your 512 kbps is NOT "too far low [sic] to establish a phone call via Skype." Skype says you can do video calling/screen sharing with 300 kbps.

https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA1417/how-much-bandwidth-does-skype-need
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, March 3, 2019 12:40:12 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
As Audeindus, tried replying to me many times and I'd much appreciate it. But, I still have these three points below needed to be addressed. So, could anyone please at this splendid forum take some of their precious time to answer these points?

Audiendus wrote:

A cooperator wrote:
Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others? No.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application. "Through" is not a preposition here - it is part of the verb phrase "gone through". The preposition "by" is needed: "Your application must be gone through by..." [someone/something]

1. You said that you don't know other prepositions used to introduce the agent.
"in" Vs. "by"
The snow covers the hill. It can be made into the passive as: the hills are covered in/by snow.
Paint covered the children. I can make it into the passive as "The children were covered in/by paint.

2. You considered "with" one of prepositions which is used after passive verbs to introduce the agent. But, I am confused if "with" is here just one of the prepositions used after past participles which are used like adjectives or one of the prepositions used to introduce the agent.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
The room was filled with thick smokes. => Thick smokes filled the room.

3. You said "through" is a preposition a part of the idiomatic phrasal verb "go + through". So, "by" is needed to introduce the agent if we want to.
Someone/something went through my room. => My room was went through by someone/something.

Do you think even "by" is needed to introduce the agent if the "through" is an independent preposition of the unidiomatic phrasal verb "go through"?
A car went through a puddle and covered me with mud. => A puddle was went through by a car.
They ran through the gate. => The gate was ran through by them.

If "through" was not a preposition introducing the agent in the two examples just above, could you give me an example when "through" is used after a passive verb to introduce the agent?


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Monday, March 4, 2019 5:02:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Could anyone please at this splendid forum take some of their precious time to address these points and finish this pending matter?

Audiendus wrote:

A cooperator wrote:
Finally: I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others? No.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application. "Through" is not a preposition here - it is part of the verb phrase "gone through". The preposition "by" is needed: "Your application must be gone through by..." [someone/something]

1. You said that you don't know other prepositions used to introduce the agent.
"in" Vs. "by"
The snow covers the hill. It can be made into the passive as: the hills are covered in/by snow.
Paint covered the children. I can make it into the passive as "The children were covered in/by paint.

2. You considered "with" one of prepositions which is used after passive verbs to introduce the agent. But, I am confused if "with" is here just one of the prepositions used after past participles which are used like adjectives or one of the prepositions used to introduce the agent.
I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
The room was filled with thick smokes. => Thick smokes filled the room.

3. You said "through" is a preposition a part of the idiomatic phrasal verb "go + through". So, "by" is needed to introduce the agent if we want to.
Someone/something went through my room. => My room was went through by someone/something.

Do you think even "by" is needed to introduce the agent if the "through" is an independent preposition of the unidiomatic phrasal verb "go through"?
A car went through a puddle and covered me with mud. => A puddle was went through by a car.
They ran through the gate. => The gate was ran through by them.
Messages that go through diplomatic channels to the ambassador => Messages that are gone through diplomatic channels to the ambassador. =>diplomatic channels go messages to to the ambassador.

If "through" was not a preposition introducing the agent in the three examples just above, could you give me an example when "through" is used after a passive verb to introduce the agent?


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
thar
Posted: Monday, March 4, 2019 5:19:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 18,915
Neurons: 76,555
Look at alternative answers to your question.

The hills are green
The hills are covered in snow

There is no agent here, no passive verb. This is an adjective. You know it must be an adjective because the potential 'agent' is not preceded by 'by'.


Again, you have to look at what the choice of words is telling you. Is there an agent here?

The room was filled with smoke.
The bucket was filled with water.
But
You filled the bucket with water.

That is not the difference between and active and passive verb - it is still there in the active verb.

You cannot take examples and try to fit them into your idea of what a passive verb + agent is. The language is more flexible than that.

You are trying to combine several different grammar points all at the same time and getting confused. Go back and look at the verb each time, before you try to form the passive. Make the passive first, a complete sentence. Then add 'by the agent' if you want.
The car went through a puddle. The puddle was gone through. The puddle was gone through by a car.
I ran through the gate. The gate was run through. The gate was run through by me.
(if anyone complains, I know these are very poor examples, but I am really not up to starting new ones that would be better!)

If I understand correctly, Audiendus said that 'through' does not introduce the agent. You need to read what people say, not try to keep on trying with your original idea even when the responder says it is not correct!
A cooperator
Posted: Monday, March 4, 2019 5:46:15 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
thar wrote:


You are trying to combine several different grammar points all at the same time and getting confused. Go back and look at the verb each time, before you try to form the passive. Make the passive first, a complete sentence. Then add 'by the agent' if you want.
The car went through a puddle. The puddle was gone through. The puddle was gone through by a car.
I ran through the gate. The gate was run through. The gate was run through by me.
(if anyone complains, I know these are very poor examples, but I am really not up to starting new ones that would be better!)

If I understand correctly, Audiendus said that 'through' does not introduce the agent. You need to read what people say, not try to keep on trying with your original idea even when the responder says it is not correct!


Thar,
I think that Audiendus said 'through' is not a preposition used to introduce the agent in that specific example, and not in general.

Audiendus wrote:

I am faced with a problem..... => a problem faces me.
Your application must be gone through...... => someone/something must go through your application. "Through" is not a preposition here - it is part of the verb phrase "gone through". The preposition "by" is needed: "Your application must be gone through by..." [someone/something]


That is why I've given those three examples you edited some of them asking if 'through' can be used as a preposition introducing an agent.

Also, when I'd asked Audiendus, he replied with 'no', which means he doesn't know other prepositions other than 'by, with, and through' used to introduce an agent in passive forms.

Audiendus wrote:
I only know that the prepositions coming after passive forms to introduce the agent are 'by, with, through'. Do you know any others? No.


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, March 9, 2019 5:54:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,304
Neurons: 12,385
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Would anyone please confirm my last post to Thar?

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
BobShilling
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:12:52 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 680
Neurons: 4,357
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
I confirm that it exists.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.