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

Profile: Gabriel82
About
User Name: Gabriel82
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Male
Statistics
Joined: Saturday, July 22, 2017
Last Visit: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 11:42:05 PM
Number of Posts: 123
[0.01% of all post / 0.11 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: participle & gerund (verb + n.+ v-ing)
Posted: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 1:05:50 AM
zhonglc2020 wrote:
Hello everyone,

The following sentences are invented by myself for grammar learning.

I know the man standing under the tree.

1. The first meaning jumping to mind is, I know the man, and he is standing under the tree now.
Here "standing under the tree" is a participle phrase. The participle phrase functions as an attributive of "the man".
The implied meaning, say, is: I know this man but I don't know that man who is standing by the door.

2. Can it also be read as : I know the-man's-standing-under-the-tree action/event?
That is, can I regard "the man standing" as a gerund structure? Is it possible?

3. And, neither of two "thes" can be replaced by "a" in this specific sentence.


I saw the man standing under the tree.
I've shifted "know" to "saw".
I think a different type of verbs will make a difference, though the structure remains the same.

1. Here "standing under the tree" is a complement. I saw the man, and he is standing there.
Basically, "standing under the tree" functions as a non-attributive. It adds more information to the man.
The implied meaning may be, There is only one man here I am talking about.

2. Similarly,my puzzle,
I saw the man's standing under the tree. --- Can this be possible?

3. And,
01 I hear the man singing.
02 I hear the man's singing
03 I hear the glass being broken.
04 I hear the glass's being broken,

# 01 and # 04 are correct. What about #02 and #04?



Many many thanks.


I'm not really sure where you want to go with this, but I will break it down how I believe you're wanting.

I--subject
know--verb
man--direct object
standing under the tree--gerund phrase functioning as an adjective to tell you "which" man or "what kind" of man.

However, the man is not standing under the tree "now"--he is simply there. This is a declarative sentence that states a fact, nothing more. This is not an action nor an event.

On "I saw the man standing under the tree," the shift is incorrect. To conform to reporting, you must shift the same verb back one tense to the past.

Naturally changing the verb changes the meaning. If you "saw" the man, you only noted him there using your eyes. If you "knew" the man, then you recognized him because you met him before--and all this happened when you first saw him and your brain matched the image with your knowledge of this man.

Any time you use "the," you specify one particular person; if you use "a" this is considered indefinite and lacking specificity.

#4 must read "I hear the glasses being broken."

Hope this answers your questions.
Topic: Wordhub
Posted: Saturday, August 17, 2019 6:08:59 PM
Beth Rosser wrote:
Why when I play Wordhub does it not recognise the word rape?


Many such words are left out like "rape," which is a valid definition of the English language. Many others that seemingly would be viewed as "offensive" by some are never recognized either even though you could spell them with the letters. It is ridiculous, and certainly a head-scratcher. What confuses me is how much slang is recognized that comes from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Scotland and other places, that even the most traveling person would never hear nor even see written. I have tons of South African and Australian friends and I never see them use those words when chatting with me.
Topic: Moby-Dick or Moby Dick
Posted: Saturday, August 3, 2019 12:58:14 AM
tomcrosson wrote:
Hello Wordnicks -

The question is which is correct - "Moby-Dick" or "Moby Dick?"

Wikipedia = Moby-Dick / TheFreeDictionary = Moby Dick

The original book cover has it "Moby-Dick; or, The Whale."

Yet, in researching book covers it shows both ways.

Or, do we cop-out & presume both are correct & leave it like that?

For the record, Mr. Melville was unavailable to comment.

With Thanks,

Tom Comstock
Fremont, CA


Grammatically speaking, it would be "Moby Dick," as hyphens are never used in the original way. The closest correct use (as an example) would be the following: "Wow! Did I screw up on buying this gas-guzzling Honda Pilot!!" Another might be "don't you know that you have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity on your hands?"
Topic: throw/cast
Posted: Saturday, July 27, 2019 7:30:56 PM
"Throw" is general as in tossing something in a direction, like a baseball pitcher might do. "Cast" is more specific to fishing, where you "cast" your lure to a certain point. You can also "cast" your eyes in a certain direction but that's simply to look that way, not take them out of your head and throw them somewhere. ;)
Topic: if thy right eye offend thee
Posted: Monday, July 15, 2019 12:26:30 PM
Lazarius,

You may or may not need the modern English equivalent, but all I could suggest is to do two things:

1) Use a parallel version, like a 1611 KJV or more recent KJV against a New King James Bible. Bible Gateway will give you more translations, but Blue Letter Bible is good for what it has.

2) if you want to be sure of the word, look up the corresponding Greek (New Testament) or Hebrew (Old Testament) number reference in a Strong's Concordance (both Old and New Testaments) or for greater depth in the Old Testament, a Brown-Driver-Briggs Concordance. Sometimes you can also check the Vine's Concordance for help.
Topic: Meals
Posted: Monday, July 15, 2019 12:18:01 AM
What is your question?

If you ask if wholly is "completely," you are correct.
Topic: Predator In Chief
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 4:28:20 PM
Daily Kos is hard-left liberal garbage and hardly a credible source.
Topic: A Long but Fascinating Story of How the Koch Brothers Made Their Huge Fortunes - FYI
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 4:25:11 PM
Rolling Stone is hardly a credible source, especially not with the rape story they published, defaming someone and losing the case to the tune of $1.65 million.

To refresh people's minds about how far off the rails "Rolling Stone" is.

Topic: something very strange happened to her
Posted: Monday, March 18, 2019 1:21:17 AM
Reiko07 wrote:
(1) Karen stayed in a town near Area 51 for a few weeks, during which time something very strange happened to her.

(2) Karen stayed in a town near Area 51 for a few weeks, during which time she had something very strange happen to her.

(my original sentences)

Do you see any difference in connotation between these two sentences?



Superficially, there is no apparent difference in the sentences. However, there are two separate tenses used. The first uses simple past, which indicates a single completed action at ONE point in the past; the second employs the past perfect, that implies two actions and could imply two slightly different reasons at two different points in time in the past (see the link here).

It ultimately depends if you wish to emphasize ONLY one action or to suggest two occurred.
Topic: Liverpool man
Posted: Sunday, March 17, 2019 11:47:46 PM
Reiko07 wrote:
Is it correct to say "a Liverpool man" to mean "a man from Liverpool"?

The other day, a Liverpool man spoke to me suddenly.



In this case, it is best to say "The other day, a man from Liverpool spoke to me suddenly," in order to show his origin. See the link here for the related examples on "Categories of Prepositions."