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

'leaking' is an adjectival participle or present continuous tense + an intransitive verb Options
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, November 2, 2019 7:31:13 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Hi,
"The leaking plumbing was repaired" can be thought of as "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired".

So, is "was leaking" in "The plumbing was leaking", an ordinary linking verb + an adjectival participle, or a present continuous tense + an intransitive verb?
BobShilling
Posted: Sunday, November 3, 2019 4:05:59 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 1,448
Neurons: 7,886
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
A cooperator wrote:
Hi,
"The leaking plumbing was repaired" can be thought of as "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired".


The first 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally. The second is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, November 3, 2019 5:02:21 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
BobShilling wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Hi,
"The leaking plumbing was repaired" can be thought of as "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired".


The first 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally. The second is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.


Thanks a lot,
But, a learner of English or maybe even a native English speaker can confuse 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally' with the 'leaking' part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.

I am, myself, can only quite distinguish that 'leaking' is an adjectival participle in "The leaking plumbing was repaired" since it is modifying a noun.
However, Audienduos, some day was drilling this rule into me:
An interesting book.(= a book which is interesting)
An engrossing story (= a story which is engrossing)
A boring party (= a party which was boring)
An enlightening explanation (= an explanation which is enlightening)

So, based on what Audienduos said, whatever a participle is, we can use this rule.
So, "The leaking plumbing was repaired" = (means) "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired."


So, how is 'leaking' in the first is an adjectival participle, but it is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak' in the second?

In other words, why you didn't say 'leaking', in the second, is an adjectival participle used predictively (after a linking verb)? ('Was'... an ordinary linking verb, 'Leaking" ...Intransitive/active/adjectival participle)
Audiendus
Posted: Sunday, November 3, 2019 8:18:42 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
But, a learner of English or maybe even a native English speaker can confuse 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally' with the 'leaking' part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.

There is a simple test to distinguish the two. If "very ____ing" makes sense, the "____ing" word is adjectival. If "very ____ing" does not make sense, the "____ing" word is part of a progressive tense.

The book is very interesting
The story is very engrossing
The party was very boring
The explanation was very enlightening

The plumbing was very leaking
I am very studying
It was very raining
She has been very writing
The man was very running to catch the bus.
Someone is very shouting
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 5:30:24 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
But, a learner of English or maybe even a native English speaker can confuse 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally' with the 'leaking' part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.

There is a simple test to distinguish the two. If "very ____ing" makes sense, the "____ing" word is adjectival. If "very ____ing" does not make sense, the "____ing" word is part of a progressive tense.

The book is very interesting
The story is very engrossing
The party was very boring
The explanation was very enlightening

The plumbing was very leaking
I am very studying
It was very raining
She has been very writing
The man was very running to catch the bus.
Someone is very shouting



Thanks a lot, Audiendus,
That's a good idea.
But, based on the rule you gave: An interesting book.(= a book which is interesting)
So, "The leaking plumbing was repaired" = (means) "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired."

So, as long as they are just two ways to say the same thing, how is 'leaking' in the first an adjectival participle, but it is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak' in the second?
However, 'interesting' keeps 'an adjectival participle' in both "An interesting book was read.(= a book which was interesting was read.)"
I hope you understand the point.
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:47:01 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
But, based on the rule you gave: An interesting book.(= a book which is interesting)
So, "The leaking plumbing was repaired" = (means) "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired."

So, as long as they are just two ways to say the same thing, how is 'leaking' in the first an adjectival participle, but it is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak' in the second?
However, 'interesting' keeps 'an adjectival participle' in both "An interesting book was read.(= a book which was interesting was read.)"
I hope you understand the point.

Think carefully about why "very" makes sense in some cases but not in others. A predicative adjectival participle describes the nature of something (what kind of thing it is) or the state of something (what condition it is in). Just as something can be very big or very small, it can be very interesting or very boring. A progressive tense, however, describes an action of something (what it is/was doing). We cannot say "the plumbing very leaked"; likewise we cannot say "the plumbing was very leaking" (but we can say "the plumbing was very leaky").

When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test. "A very interesting book" makes sense, so if "interesting" were predicative it would still be adjectival. But we cannot say "very leaking plumbing" or "a very running man" or "a very listening child", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative.

As always, you cannot analyse these sentences just by considering the form of the words; you have to consider their meaning also.
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, November 7, 2019 6:12:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
But, a learner of English or maybe even a native English speaker can confuse 'leaking' is a present participle functioning adjectivally' with the 'leaking' part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak'.

There is a simple test to distinguish the two. If "very ____ing" makes sense, the "____ing" word is adjectival. If "very ____ing" does not make sense, the "____ing" word is part of a progressive tense.

The book is very interesting
The story is very engrossing
The party was very boring
The explanation was very enlightening

The plumbing was very leaking
I am very studying
It was very raining
She has been very writing
The man was very running to catch the bus.
Someone is very shouting



For some "____ing" words , such as 'striking': 1. means to stop working on your duty asking about demands to be accepted. 2. very noticeable, making a strong impression:
Many workers sympathised with the striking miners. [ the sense #1; adjectival present participle]
There is a striking similarity between the two men.[the sense #2; "striking" is an ordinary adjective although it is formed like the adjectival present participle "striking" #2 - they are alike in the spellings]
So, it's obvious that 'striking' is an adjective in "There is a striking similarity between the two men".
On the other hand, in "Many workers sympathised with the striking miners." it's very difficult to know if "striking" is an adjectival present participle or part of a progressive tense even with this test.

"Many workers sympathised with the striking miners." = "Many workers sympathised with the striking miners(the miners who are striking.)"
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, November 7, 2019 9:03:04 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
On the other hand, in "Many workers sympathised with the striking miners." it's very difficult to know if "striking" is an adjectival present participle or part of a progressive tense even with this test.

"Many workers sympathised with the striking miners." = "Many workers sympathised with the striking miners(the miners who are striking.)"


"Striking" is what they were doing; it refers here to an action. So "are/were striking" is a progressive tense.
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, November 10, 2019 5:37:35 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
But, based on the rule you gave: An interesting book.(= a book which is interesting)
So, "The leaking plumbing was repaired" = (means) "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired."

So, as long as they are just two ways to say the same thing, how is 'leaking' in the first an adjectival participle, but it is part of the past progressive of the verb 'leak' in the second?
However, 'interesting' keeps 'an adjectival participle' in both "An interesting book was read.(= a book which was interesting was read.)"
I hope you understand the point.

Think carefully about why "very" makes sense in some cases but not in others. A predicative adjectival participle describes the nature of something (what kind of thing it is) or the state of something (what condition it is in). Just as something can be very big or very small, it can be very interesting or very boring. A progressive tense, however, describes an action of something (what it is/was doing). We cannot say "the plumbing very leaked"; likewise we cannot say "the plumbing was very leaking" (but we can say "the plumbing was very leaky").

When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test. "A very interesting book" makes sense, so if "interesting" were predicative it would still be adjectival. But we cannot say "very leaking plumbing" or "a very running man" or "a very listening child", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative.


Audiendus,
According to this thread entitled 'recurring billing/leaking plumbing/escaped lion' NOT 'recurred billing/leaked plumbing/escaping lio,

First,
(A) Participles which can only be used as adjectival present participles, and not as part of a continuous tense wherever the participle is placed, predictively(after a linking verb) or attributively (before a noun):
1- Recurring billing is a payment model used when a subscription business charges a customer's credit card for products or services on a regular billing schedule. (= Billing which is recurring is a payment model.....) [ "recurring" is only an adjectival participle since "very recurring" can make sense - we can say "is very recurring"]
A recurring invoice is a type of invoicing in which a supplier or merchant automatically charges a customer for goods or services at regular intervals. (= An invoice which is recurring is a type of invoicing.......) [ "recurring" is only an adjectival participle since "very recurring" can make sense - we can say "is very recurring"]

2- "An interesting book was read.(= a book which was interesting was read.)" ["interesting" is only an adjectival participle since "very interesting" can make sense - we can say "was very interesting"]

(B) Participles which can only be used as part of a continuous tense, not as an adjectival present participles wherever the participle is placed, predictively(after a linking verb) or attributively (before a noun):
1- "the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea") (the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off) [ "winking" is part of a continuous tense since 'very winking' doesn't make sense - we cannot say "are/were/have been very winking"]
2- The leaking plumbing was repaired" = (means) "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired." ["leaking" is part of a continuous tense since 'very leaking' doesn't make sense - we cannot say "was very leaking".]
3- Many workers sympathised with the striking miners." = "Many workers sympathised with the striking miners(the miners who are striking.)"["Striking" is part of a continuous tense since 'very striking' doesn't make sense - we cannot say "are/were very striking". "striking" is what they were doing; it refers here to an action. So "are/were striking" is a progressive tense.]
4- "The escaping lion was being shot" = (means) "The lion which was escaping was being shot." ["escaping" is part of a continuous tense since 'very leaking' doesn't make sense -we cannot say "was very escaping"].
5- A man committed suicide by throwing himself under a moving train.(= ....a train which was moving.)
A moving train flipped over onto its other side. (= A train which was moving flipped over onto its other side)

Final, do you think that the 'very' test can be useful to distinguish if any -ing word is used as an adjectival participle or part of a continuous tense wherever the 'ing' word is placed?


A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, November 10, 2019 5:58:34 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
Think carefully about why "very" makes sense in some cases but not in others. A predicative adjectival participle describes the nature of something (what kind of thing it is) or the state of something (what condition it is in). Just as something can be very big or very small, it can be very interesting or very boring. A progressive tense, however, describes an action of something (what it is/was doing). We cannot say "the plumbing very leaked"; likewise we cannot say "the plumbing was very leaking" (but we can say "the plumbing was very leaky").

When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test. "A very interesting book" makes sense, so if "interesting" were predicative it would still be adjectival. But we cannot say "very leaking plumbing" or "a very running man" or "a very listening child", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative.



Audiendus,

Second, the "very" test to distinguish if a present participle is an adjectival present participle, or part of a continuous tense can also be applied for distinguishing if a past participle is used as an adjectival past participle, or part of a passive verb wherever past participle is placed, predictively(after a linking verb) or attributively (before a noun):

1- an escaped lion(= a lion which has escaped) ["escaped" is part of a present perfect tense since "very escaped" cannot make sense - we cannot say "has very inspired"]

2- there is a shortage of trained teachers. =( there is a shortage of teachers who are trained.) [ "trained" is part of a passive verb since "very trained" cannot make sense - we cannot say "are very trained"]

3- an inspired leader (= an inspired who is/was/has been inspired) ["inspired" is part of a passive verb since 'very inspired" cannot make sense - we cannot say "is/was/has been very inspired"]

Third, for 'escaped', I only see it is used as part of perfect tense, not as adjective past participle, nor as part of a passive verb.

Final, for 'trained', I see "very" test is not helpful since "very trained" can make sense - we can say "are very trained". So, how can I distinguish if 'trained' is used as an adjectival past participle, or part of a passive verb?






A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, November 10, 2019 6:35:27 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.

So, can I say:
"The winking girl to the camera is my classmate."(= The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.)
The winking girl at me is my classmate. (The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.)
Audiendus
Posted: Sunday, November 10, 2019 9:38:16 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
I am sorry, I cannot spend any more time on this thread. I will leave it to others to answer if they wish.
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 12:01:24 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
I am sorry, I cannot spend any more time on this thread. I will leave it to others to answer if they wish.


Audiendus,
Could you please at least confirm these two points, especially those participles which are paired with prepositions, such as 'wink at/to', make me confuse:
The first point:
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.

So, can I say:
"The winking girl to the camera is my classmate."(= The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.)
The winking girl at me is my classmate. (The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.)



The second point:
The present participle can be used as a verb - (He is working) - or an adjective - (a working mother) - whilst the ing word is used as a noun only(NOT a gerund, since gerund has not plural and "of" after it) in (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
So, I am seeing "a very working mother" makes sense. So, 'working' is used an attributive adjectival participle.
But, if "working" were predicative it would NOT still be adjectival.(we cannot say "a mother that/who is very working")
As a result, 'working' is adjectival in the first phrase, but part of a continuous tense in the second although they are two ways to say the same thing: "a working mother (=a mother that/who is working). So, if we are going to phrase "a very working mother" as "a mother who/that is very working", we must write 'very' in the second phrase as long as it makes sense in the first alternative phrase.

So,
- "working" is functioning as an adjective if placed before the noun, but part of a continuous tense if predicative.
- "interesting" is functioning only as an adjective (never as part of a continuous tense) if placed before the noun or predicative?
- "leaking" is functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if if placed before the noun or predicative?
When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test.

A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, November 16, 2019 4:02:49 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus, replied to me as much as he could.
Could anyone please take some of their precious time out to reply to these two points of mine?

Could you please at least confirm these two points, especially those participles which are paired with prepositions, such as 'wink at/to', make me confuse:
The first point:
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.

So, can I say:
"The winking girl to the camera is my classmate."(= The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate.)
The winking girl at me is my classmate. (The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.)



The second point:
The present participle can be used as a verb - (He is working) - or an adjective - (a working mother) - whilst the ing word is used as a noun only(NOT a gerund, since gerund has not plural and "of" after it) in (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
So, I am seeing "a very working mother" makes sense. So, 'working' is used an attributive adjectival participle.
But, if "working" were predicative it would NOT still be adjectival.(we cannot say "a mother that/who is very working")
As a result, 'working' is adjectival in the first phrase, but part of a continuous tense in the second although they are two ways to say the same thing: "a working mother (=a mother that/who is working). So, if we are going to phrase "a very working mother" as "a mother who/that is very working", we must write 'very' in the second phrase as long as it makes sense in the first alternative phrase.

So,
- "working" is functioning as an adjective if placed before the noun, but part of a continuous tense if predicative.
- "interesting" is functioning only as an adjective (never as part of a continuous tense) if placed before the noun or predicative?
- "leaking" is functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if if placed before the noun or predicative?
When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test.


FounDit
Posted: Saturday, November 16, 2019 5:13:24 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 13,885
Neurons: 66,293
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus, replied to me as much as he could.
Could anyone please take some of their precious time out to reply to these two points of mine?

Could you please at least confirm these two points, especially those participles which are paired with prepositions, such as 'wink at/to', make me confuse:
The first point:
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate. We don't usually wink "to" someone or something, we wink "at" someone, or something.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate. Okay.

So, can I say:
"The winking girl to the camera is my classmate." No.(= The girl that is winking at the camera is my classmate. ) You can say this one.
The winking girl at me is my classmate. No. (The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.) You can say it this way.



The second point:
The present participle can be used as a verb - (He is working) - or an adjective - (a working mother) - whilst the ing word is used as a noun only(NOT a gerund, since gerund has not plural and "of" after it) in (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
So, I am seeing "a very working mother" makes sense. So, 'working' is used an attributive adjectival participle.
But, if "working" were predicative it would NOT still be adjectival.(we cannot say "a mother that/who is very working")
As a result, 'working' is adjectival in the first phrase, but part of a continuous tense in the second although they are two ways to say the same thing: "a working mother (=a mother that/who is working). So, if we are going to phrase "a very working mother" as "a mother who/that is very working", we must write 'very' in the second phrase as long as it makes sense in the first alternative phrase.
No. If she is a working mother, that is how she would be described. The word "very" adds nothing to that description. You would use "very" in combination with another adjective such as "hardworking", or "busy" mother.

So,
- "working" is functioning as an adjective if placed before the noun, but part of a continuous tense if predicative.
- "interesting" is functioning only as an adjective (never as part of a continuous tense) if placed before the noun or predicative?
- "leaking" is functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if if placed before the noun or predicative?
When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test.
I can't help you with this part. My knowledge of grammar is very basic and grammar terms have changed dramatically since my school days.

A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, December 8, 2019 5:50:33 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
FounDit wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus, replied to me as much as he could.
Could anyone please take some of their precious time out to reply to these two points of mine?

Could you please at least confirm these two points, especially those participles which are paired with prepositions, such as 'wink at/to', make me confuse:
The first point:
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate. We don't usually wink "to" someone or something, we wink "at" someone, or something.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate. Okay.


Thanks a lot, FounDit,
Whoops! You've amazed me. I'm wondering 'wink at someone/to something' is correct, because, having seen an Arab friend of mine only writing "The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate", it looks as though my dictionaries have not defined 'wink' as "wink at someone/something".

The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English only listed the ordinary intransitive verb "wink" as "intransitive"/transitive":
"Wink [+ at]", as said here in this thread entitled Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English marks 'wink' as transitive
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, December 8, 2019 6:08:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
FounDit wrote:
A cooperator wrote:

The second point:
The present participle can be used as a verb - (He is working) - or an adjective - (a working mother) - whilst the ing word is used as a noun only(NOT a gerund, since gerund has not plural and "of" after it) in (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
So, I am seeing "a very working mother" makes sense. So, 'working' is used an attributive adjectival participle.
But, if "working" were predicative it would NOT still be adjectival.(we cannot say "a mother that/who is very working")
As a result, 'working' is adjectival in the first phrase, but part of a continuous tense in the second although they are two ways to say the same thing: "a working mother (=a mother that/who is working). So, if we are going to phrase "a very working mother" as "a mother who/that is very working", we must write 'very' in the second phrase as long as it makes sense in the first alternative phrase.
No. If she is a working mother, that is how she would be described. The word "very" adds nothing to that description. You would use "very" in combination with another adjective such as "hardworking", or "busy" mother.

So,
- "working" is functioning as an adjective if placed before the noun, but part of a continuous tense if predicative.
- "interesting" is functioning only as an adjective (never as part of a continuous tense) if placed before the noun or predicative?
- "leaking" is functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if placed before the noun or predicative?
When the "-ing" word is placed before the noun, this difference is hidden, because in both the above cases the "-ing" word is now functioning as an adjective. But you can still apply the "very" test.
I can't help you with this part. My knowledge of grammar is very basic and grammar terms have changed dramatically since my school days.

Thanks a lot, FounDit,
I approvingly agree with what you've said.
I am just confused with if 'very' can make sense putting before 'working' or not in 'a very working mother'. But, you said 'very' cannot make sense putting before 'working'.
So, based on the rule, Audiendus helpt list it, this 'working' is definitely functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if placed before the noun or predicative. Likewise "leaking" is functioning as part of a continuous tense(never as an adjective) if placed before the noun or predicative.
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, December 29, 2019 6:58:37 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
FounDit wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
The second point:
The present participle can be used as a verb - (He is working) - or an adjective - (a working mother) - whilst the ing word is used as a noun only(NOT a gerund, since gerund has not plural and "of" after it) in (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
So, I am seeing "a very working mother" makes sense. So, 'working' is used an attributive adjectival participle.
But, if "working" were predicative it would NOT still be adjectival.(we cannot say "a mother that/who is very working")
As a result, 'working' is adjectival in the first phrase, but part of a continuous tense in the second although they are two ways to say the same thing: "a working mother (=a mother that/who is working). So, if we are going to phrase "a very working mother" as "a mother who/that is very working", we must write 'very' in the second phrase as long as it makes sense in the first alternative phrase.
No. If she is a working mother, that is how she would be described. The word "very" adds nothing to that description. You would use "very" in combination with another adjective such as "hardworking", or "busy" mother.


FounDit,
Could you please finish this confusion?
According to Audiendus rule:
Quote:
There is a simple test to distinguish the two. If "very ____ing" makes sense, the "____ing" word is adjectival. If "very ____ing" does not make sense, the "____ing" word is part of a progressive tense.

The book is very interesting
The story is very engrossing
The party was very boring
The explanation was very enlightening


I think "a very working mother" or even "a mother who is/was very working" can make no sense.
So, "working" must be part of a continuous tense, not an adjective according to Audiendus rule.
thar
Posted: Sunday, December 29, 2019 7:13:34 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 22,197
Neurons: 90,017
Remember meaning is more important than grammar labels.

What does 'a working mother' mean?
It does not mean a mother who is currently performing a action - it is a mother who works, who has a job.


Quote:
Definition. Working mothers, as a label, refers to women who are mothers and who work outside the home for income in addition to the work they perform at home in raising their children.



It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Don't get too set in labelling everything - lots of phrases are idiomatic and have meaning in context that you can't see just by looking at the words without context.
A cooperator
Posted: Sunday, December 29, 2019 7:18:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
thar wrote:
Remember meaning is more important than grammar labels.

What does 'a working mother' mean?
It does not mean a mother who is currently performing a action - it is a mother who works, who has a job.


Quote:
Definition. Working mothers, as a label, refers to women who are mothers and who work outside the home for income in addition to the work they perform at home in raising their children.



It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Don't get too set in labelling everything - lots of phrases are idiomatic and have meaning in context that you can't see just by looking at the words without context.


Thanks a lot, Thar

So, you destroyed and broke the Audiendus rule which was helping me distinguish if "____ing" word is adjectival or part of a continuous tense. If you did not do, then "a very working mother" or "a mother who is very working" must make sense as long as "working" is an adjective here.

thar wrote:
It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Thar, remember that "a working mother" can mean "a mother who is working". So, don't you think that "working" now describes what she is doing, especially in the second phrase?

So, If you wanna say "the mother who is working" here it is a verb (part of a progressive tense)
But
"A working mother " is an adjective here.
palapaguy
Posted: Monday, December 30, 2019 1:04:18 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 1,910
Neurons: 14,578
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
A cooperator wrote:
thar wrote:
Remember meaning is more important than grammar labels.

What does 'a working mother' mean?
It does not mean a mother who is currently performing a action - it is a mother who works, who has a job.


Quote:
Definition. Working mothers, as a label, refers to women who are mothers and who work outside the home for income in addition to the work they perform at home in raising their children.



It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Don't get too set in labelling everything - lots of phrases are idiomatic and have meaning in context that you can't see just by looking at the words without context.


Thanks a lot, Thar

So, you destroyed and broke the Audiendus rule which was helping me distinguish if "____ing" word is adjectival or part of a continuous tense. If you did not do, then "a very working mother" or "a mother who is very working" must make sense as long as "working" is an adjective here.

thar wrote:
It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Thar, remember that "a working mother" can mean "a mother who is working". So, don't you think that "working" now describes what she is doing, especially in the second phrase?

So, If you wanna say "the mother who is working" here it is a verb (part of a progressive tense)
But
"A working mother " is an adjective here.


Coop, stop arguing about your grammar rules. You can't learn this way.
Listen to the native speakers and learn from them. Focus on MEANING.


A cooperator
Posted: Monday, December 30, 2019 5:01:49 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
thar wrote:
Remember meaning is more important than grammar labels.

What does 'a working mother' mean?
It does not mean a mother who is currently performing a action - it is a mother who works, who has a job.

It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Don't get too set in labelling everything - lots of phrases are idiomatic and have meaning in context that you can't see just by looking at the words without context.


Thanks a lot, Thar

So, you destroyed and broke the Audiendus rule which was helping me distinguish if "____ing" word is adjectival or part of a continuous tense. If you did not do, then "a very working mother" or "a mother who is very working" must make sense as long as "working" is an adjective here.


"Working" in "a working mother" doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is. So, it's an adjective. But, the rule says that if "very ____ing" makes sense, then "____ing" word is adjectival. If "very ____ing" does not make sense, the "____ing" word is part of a progressive tense. But, the word "very" adds nothing to that description. So, "a very working mother" doesn't make sense. As a result, and based on the above rule, I still think of "working" as part of a progressive tense.


However, "The leaking plumbing was repaired" can be thought of as "The plumbing which was leaking was repaired"
But we cannot say "very leaking plumbing", so in this case the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative.


thar wrote:
It doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is.

Thar, remember that "a working mother" can mean "a mother who is working". So, don't you think that "working" now describes what she is doing, especially in the second phrase?

So, If you wanna say "the mother who is working" here it is a verb (part of a progressive tense)
But
"A working mother " is an adjective here.
Audiendus
Posted: Monday, December 30, 2019 11:27:27 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
OK, I just wish to make the following point.

I think 'working' in 'working mother' is a verb (a present participle, which can be part of a continuous tense), not an adjective.
We cannot say 'very working'.
Therefore, I think my rule still applies.


'A working mother', in my opinion, means 'a mother who is working' or 'a mother who works'. She is not necessarily working at this moment, but 'working' is something she habitually does. It refers to an action, not a state.

We can change "she is a working mother" to "she is a mother who works". Contrast this with 'interesting', which is definitely an adjective; we can say "she is an interesting woman" but we would not say "she is a woman who interests" (although we could add an object and say, for example, "she is a woman who interests me").

I can understand, however, why thar regards 'working' as an adjective here. In some cases, such as this, there is not a clear distinction between an adjective and a verb. Different native speakers can therefore have different opinions; even grammarians may disagree about it. Language is not an exact science.
thar
Posted: Monday, December 30, 2019 11:46:10 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 22,197
Neurons: 90,017
I think my point really was that 'a working mother' is a phrase with meaning other than 'a mother who is working'.

Whereas a leaking pipe is a pipe that is leaking, or a pipe that habitually leaks.
I don't think it is useful to put them on the same grammatical box.
It labels the parts of the sentence but does not help with the meaning or the usage.
I think that was the point I was aiming for.
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, January 2, 2020 6:23:29 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
thar wrote:
I think my point really was that 'a working mother' is a phrase with meaning other than 'a mother who is working'.

Whereas a leaking pipe is a pipe that is leaking, or a pipe that habitually leaks.
I don't think it is useful to put them on the same grammatical box.
It labels the parts of the sentence but does not help with the meaning or the usage.
I think that was the point I was aiming for.


Thanks a lot, thar
I know you say "Working" in "a working mother" doesn't really describe what she is doing. It describes what she is. So, it's an adjective. If we want it to be a part of a progressive tense, we can say "a mother who is working".

But, I am wondering if just adding the word "very" makes no sense(a very working mother), or it only adds nothing to the description(But, we can add it if we want "a very working mother").

If the word 'very' adds nothing to the description(but, we can add it if we want "a very working mother"), then the Audiendus' rule saying (if "very _ing" makes sense, then "__ing" word is adjectival. If "very __ing" does not make sense, the "___ing" word is part of a progressive tense) would be still useful and applied. So, 'a very working mother' can make sense. So, the "-ing" word would be adjectival participles even if the "-ing" word were predicative.("a mother who is very working").

If the word "very" makes no sense(a very working mother), then the Audiendus' rule cannot be useful and applied since the "___ing" word is functioning as an adjective, although adding 'very' makes no sense.

But nevertheless, do you not think we can use 'working' as an adjective in a predicative position(the same as in 'interest')
It was interesting to talk with him. [linking verb + adjectival participle]
He was interesting to talk with. [linking verb + adjectival participle]
An interesting man.(a man that is interesting)[linking verb + adjectival participle]

a working mother(a mother who is working) [linking verb + adjectival participle]
He was working for a private company. [linking verb + adjectival participle]




If not, then why we can say "a very interesting book", or "a very engrossing story", "a very enlightening explanation", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be adjectival participles even if the "-ing" word were predicative. "a book which is/was very interesting", or "a story which is/was very engrossing", "an explanation which is/was very enlightening".
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, January 2, 2020 6:48:28 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
thar wrote:
I think my point really was that 'a working mother' is a phrase with meaning other than 'a mother who is working'.

Whereas a leaking pipe is a pipe that is leaking, or a pipe that habitually leaks.


First, Thar, I was expecting if verbs cannot be used as intransitive verbs(always used transitively), then their present participles cannot be used as adjectival participles (used before nouns). For instance, we cannot say: "an assigning employee/job" or "an assigning random value"/"assigning random values" since 'assign' is only used transitively.
But, since then I see "Interest" cannot be used as an intransitive verb(always transitive). However, its present participle can be used as an adjectival participle:
An interesting man.(a man that is interesting) [linking verb + adjectival participle]
A man/He was interesting to talk with. [linking verb + adjectival participle]

Could you please help me eliminate this confusion?

Second, but the issue lays in present participles of intransitive verbs.
For instance, we can say "leaking plumbing" or "a running man" or "a listening child", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative. As a result,(according to Audiendus's rule) we cannot say "very leaking plumbing" or "a very running man" or "a very listening child", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be part of a progressive tense if it were predicative.
So, I am wondering if only putting 'very' makes the phrases make no sense, or the phrases, "a leaking plumbing" or "a running man" or "a listening child", originally make no sense?. That's, we can think of:
'leaking plumbing' as 'plumbing that is leaking'
'a running man' as 'a man that is running'
and
'a listening child' as 'a child that is listening'

Third, we can say "a very interesting book", or "a very engrossing story", "a very enlightening explanation", so in those cases the "-ing" word would be adjectival participles even if the "-ing" word were predicative. "a book which is/was very interesting", or "a story which is/was very engrossing", "an explanation which is/was very enlightening".

But, the '-ing' word in "a working mother" would be adjectival participle if before a noun. But, if it were predicative, it'd be part of a progressive tense. As a result, I am still wondering why this happens.
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, January 2, 2020 9:20:05 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator,

Please see my latest post above. I think my rule still applies, for the reason I have given in that post.

Also:

A cooperator wrote:
He was working for a private company. [linking verb + adjectival participle]

This is definitely not a linking verb + adjectival participle. It is the past progressive tense of 'work'. The past simple equivalent would be "He worked for a private company".
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, January 4, 2020 10:17:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
OK, I just wish to make the following point.

I think 'working' in 'working mother' is a verb (a present participle, which can be part of a continuous tense), not an adjective.
We cannot say 'very working'.
Therefore, I think my rule still applies.

Audiendus,
Thanks a lot,

"The transfer of money from Webmoney to a bank account takes from 1 to 3 working days."
I neither think "working" in "Working days" is an adjective nor a verb. We cannot say "very working days", and we cannot say "days which are working".
So, do you think the "-ing" word "working" here is a noun? If so, then how come it's a noun here, but it's a verb in "a working mother"?
Audiendus
Posted: Saturday, January 4, 2020 11:47:48 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
"The transfer of money from Webmoney to a bank account takes from 1 to 3 working days."
I neither think "working" in "Working days" is an adjective nor a verb. We cannot say "very working days", and we cannot say "days which are working".
So, do you think the "-ing" word "working" here is a noun? If so, then how come it's a noun here, but it's a verb in "a working mother"?

"Working" in "working days" is an adjective; it modifies the noun "days". Unlike 'interesting', 'boring' etc, it cannot be used predicatively. Also, unlike the construction in "a working mother", it does not mean "days which work". Look up "working" in a dictionary and note its various meanings, which are differently related to the following noun. You will see that "working" in "working day" has a special meaning which cannot be deduced from the way the participles of other verbs are used.

I think my rule is useful in general, but (as with most such rules) you will find some exceptions. Some verbs will have participles (like 'working') which can be used in special ways that do not follow normal patterns. You need to learn these individually; there is no infallible rule which covers all of them. In some cases, as I have said, educated native speakers (and grammarians) will disagree about the appropriate grammatical analysis.

Sometimes the analysis depends entirely on the context. For example:

The peasants were revolting. [past continuous tense of 'revolt']
The peasants revolted. [past simple tense of 'revolt']
The food was revolting. [adjectival][= foul, disgusting]
The food revolted.

He is not hitting the target, although he is trying. [present continuous tense of 'try']
He does not hit the target, although he tries. [present simple tense of 'try']
When he gets drunk and argumentative, he is trying. [adjectival][= annoying, difficult]
When he gets drunk and argumentative, he tries.
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 7:52:36 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
"The transfer of money from Webmoney to a bank account takes from 1 to 3 working days."
I neither think "working" in "Working days" is an adjective nor a verb. We cannot say "very working days", and we cannot say "days which are working".
So, do you think the "-ing" word "working" here is a noun? If so, then how come it's a noun here, but it's a verb in "a working mother"?

"Working" in "working days" is an adjective; it modifies the noun "days". Unlike 'interesting', 'boring' etc, it cannot be used predicatively. Also, unlike the construction in "a working mother", it does not mean "days which work". Look up "working" in a dictionary and note its various meanings, which are differently related to the following noun. You will see that "working" in "working day" has a special meaning which cannot be deduced from the way the participles of other verbs are used.

I think my rule is useful in general, but (as with most such rules) you will find some exceptions. Some verbs will have participles (like 'working') which can be used in special ways that do not follow normal patterns. You need to learn these individually; there is no infallible rule which covers all of them. In some cases, as I have said, educated native speakers (and grammarians) will disagree about the appropriate grammatical analysis.

Sometimes the analysis depends entirely on the context. For example:

The peasants were revolting. [past continuous tense of 'revolt']
The peasants revolted. [past simple tense of 'revolt']
The food was revolting. [adjectival][= foul, disgusting]
The food revolted.

Thanks a lot,
Audiendus,

But, you didn't remark on what part of speech "working" is in "2 working days." if it is neither an adjective nor part of continues tense. I think it is a noun. Likewise "learning" is a noun in "learning tips".

Also, I still think of "revolting" as an adjective meaning "rebellious" in "The peasants were revolting."
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 9:42:11 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
But, you didn't remark on what part of speech "working" is in "2 working days."

I did – I said it is an adjective. However, see below.

A cooperator wrote:
if it is neither an adjective nor part of continues tense. I think it is a noun. Likewise "learning" is a noun in "learning tips".

OK, I will accept that. "Learning" in "learning tips" is certainly a noun (used adjectivally); "learning tips" means "tips for learning". Similarly, you can analyse "working days" as "days for working", in which "working" is a noun (gerund) used adjectivally. That is a reasonable analysis.

A cooperator wrote:
Also, I still think of "revolting" as an adjective meaning "rebellious" in "The peasants were revolting."

No, the adjective "revolting", used predicatively, does not mean "rebellious"; it means "disgusting" (from the transitive verb "revolt", meaning "to disgust", as in "this food revolts me"). "The peasants were revolting" uses the past continuous tense of the intransitive verb "revolt", meaning "to rebel". It is simply the continuous form of "the peasants revolted".

But be careful: "the peasants were revolting" sounds like a joke. A native speaker would know that it really meant "the peasants were rebelling", but would also call to mind the other meaning and think of "the peasants were disgusting". It is sometimes said deliberately as a humorous play on words.

"Revolting" can be used attributively as an adjective in either sense ("the revolting food" or "the revolting peasants"). But, again, "the revolting peasants" would sound like a joke.
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, January 11, 2020 9:31:40 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
But, you didn't remark on what part of speech "working" is in "2 working days."

I did – I said it is an adjective. However, see below.

A cooperator wrote:
if it is neither an adjective nor part of continues tense. I think it is a noun. Likewise "learning" is a noun in "learning tips".

OK, I will accept that. "Learning" in "learning tips" is certainly a noun (used adjectivally); "learning tips" means "tips for learning". Similarly, you can analyse "working days" as "days for working", in which "working" is a noun (gerund) used adjectivally. That is a reasonable analysis.


Audiendus,

How could you directly distinguish that "learning" is certainly a noun(I.e, a gerund didn't come to mind), however, "working" is a gerund used adjectivally?
AFAIK, a gerund doesn't have a plural form or "of" after it) in (The inner working/workings of a computer are beyond me. "Working(s)" is a noun).

Also, till now, "-ing" word can be used as a verb (He is working), an adjective(a working mother), a gerund (two working days), or a noun (The inner workings of a computer are beyond me.)
In general, not only for "working", don't you think it would be confused between if -ing word is part of a progressive tense, a gerund, or a noun? For instance, "working" in "It's working". It's just an example to convey the meaning.
A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, January 11, 2020 10:49:28 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
FounDit wrote:
[quote=A cooperator]Audiendus, replied to me as much as he could.
Could anyone please take some of their precious time out to reply to these two points of mine?

Could you please at least confirm these two points, especially those participles which are paired with prepositions, such as 'wink at/to', make me confuse:
The first point:
I know the participle of the sense #2 for "Wink" can be used attributively(before a noun) although it is a part of a continuous tense.
[the sense #2, Intransitive] to shine with a light that flashes on and off: ("the winking lights of buoys out to sea" = "the lights of buoys which are/were/have been winking out to sea")

However, for the sense #1, I don't know if it can be used attributively(before a noun) or not.
[the sense #1, Intransitive/Transitive] to close and open one eye quickly, usually to communicate amusement or a secret message:[+at]
Joel winked at me, and I realized he was joking.
The girl that is winking to the camera is my classmate. We don't usually wink "to" someone or something, we wink "at" someone, or something.
The girl that is winking at me is my classmate. Okay.

So, can I say:
"The winking girl to the camera is my classmate." No.(= The girl that is winking at the camera is my classmate. ) You can say this one.
The winking girl at me is my classmate. No. (The girl that is winking at me is my classmate.) You can say it this way.


FounDit,
How come we can say "surprising people with John Gray!!! (= people who are surprising with John Gray!!!)"?
But, we cannot say "The winking girl at the camera is my classmate. (we can only say "The girl who is winking at the camera is my classmate.)

That's, why can we use "surprising" either as adjectival participle placed attributively(before noun)(it can be used attributively as an adjective), or as the past continuous tense of the intransitive verb "surprise" followed by "with" if it were predicative?
However, "wink" can only be used as part of a progressive tense if predicative(it cannot be used attributively as an adjective) although both "surprising" and "wink" are propsitional verbs (verb followed by preposition)
"Surprising with"
"Wink at"

The participles which are paired with prepositions, such as '"wink at," "surprise with," "upset from, " "anger at" make me confused if they can be used attributively as adjective, and predictively as part of a progressive tense.
"The angering boy at me" = "The boy who is angering at me."



A cooperator
Posted: Saturday, January 11, 2020 11:51:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,804
Neurons: 14,637
Location: Seiyun, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:

No, the adjective "revolting", used predicatively, does not mean "rebellious"; it means "disgusting" (from the transitive verb "revolt", meaning "to disgust", as in "this food revolts me"). "The peasants were revolting" uses the past continuous tense of the intransitive verb "revolt", meaning "to rebel". It is simply the continuous form of "the peasants revolted".

But be careful: "the peasants were revolting" sounds like a joke. A native speaker would know that it really meant "the peasants were rebelling", but would also call to mind the other meaning and think of "the peasants were disgusting". It is sometimes said deliberately as a humorous play on words.

"Revolting" can be used attributively as an adjective in either sense ("the revolting food" or "the revolting peasants"). But, again, "the revolting peasants" would sound like a joke.


For the definitions of some ordinary adjectives, I sometimes see dictionaries listing the phrase "only before a noun (i.e, not used predictavitely or postpostively) such as "exiting". But, some other times, they don't list anything - (i.e, it means they can be used in any way, attributively, postpostively, and predicatively).

However, about participles, I don't know if they can be used attributively, postpostively, and predicatively.

As a result, what difference would be there between each pair of the sentences below?

The available price for the public is reasonable.
The price available for the public is reasonable.

The exhausting work is a bad job.
The work exhausting is a bad work.

"the revolting food..."
"the food revolting.... "

His leering glances were revolting to her.
His glances leering were revolting to her.



Training teachers can teach students.
Teachers training can teach students.

Experiencing teachers could facilitate a language learning.
Teachers experiencing could facilitate a language learning.


The shown price is high.
The price shown is high.

Trained teachers can teach students.
Teachers trained can teach students.

Experienced teachers could facilitate a language learning.
Teachers experienced could facilitate a language learning.


Audiendus
Posted: Sunday, January 12, 2020 1:08:46 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 6,494
Neurons: 1,223,120
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
How could you directly distinguish that "learning" is certainly a noun(I.e, a gerund didn't come to mind), however, "working" is a gerund used adjectivally?


"Working" in "working days" and "learning" in "learning tips" are both gerunds used adjectivally. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

A gerund basically acts as a noun. Like ordinary nouns, it can be used adjectivally (attributively):

rest day
celebration day
working day

health tips
exam tips
learning tips
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.