0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage

Participles: mystery or enigma?

Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins. You have got boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?
My question is about passive participles those epicene grammatical entities seldom mentioned (though often heard) in the best houses.
I understand that the passive participle is considered by grammarians to share attributes of both verbs and adjectives. (I'm trying to suppress my feelings of disgust.)
Am I justified in claiming to see a significant difference between these two verb structures (other than the present/past difference):
a) I was flummoxed by her question.
b) It's two days later and I'm still flummoxed.
And also between these two:
a) This morning he was injured in a fall.
b) He is injured.
It seems to me that in both cases the 'a)' usage
is solidly in the verb camp. These sentences describe actions or events. It seems to me also that in both cases the 'b)' usage is brazenly adjectival.
Am I in agreement with grammarians on this question, and therefore making a big flap over nothing? Or am I correct in claiming that many grammar handbooks fail to address this distinction and treat all four usages above as cases of a verb being used as an adjective?

Regards to all. Now, where's my other flipper?

Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
  

Top answer

[nq:1]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins. You have got boffins here, haven't you? [/nq] We got Murricans, and Murricans love boffin'.

  • [nq:1]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins.
  • You have got boffins here, haven't you?
  • [/nq] We got Murricans, and Murricans love boffin'.
  • Is that close enough?
  • [/nq] Well, okay, I'm willing to look ignorant.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

9 Answers
0
[nq:1]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins. You have got boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?[/nq]
We got Murricans, and Murricans love boffin'. Is that close enough?
[nq:1]My question is about passive participles those epicene grammatical entities seldom mentioned
0
[nq:1]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins. You have got boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?[/nq]
There are boffins here, but what why would you expect them to be experts on grammar?
0
[nq:2]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, ... boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?[/nq]
[nq:1]There are boffins here, but what why would you expect them to be experts on grammar?[/nq]
You can't help me then? I was of the opinion
that there was no subject too esoteric, no
field of inquiry too arcane, no matter on which
some
0
Grammarians are in agreement that there is a difference between a participle and an adjective, but that difference lies in their use, not in the form of the words themselves. That means that you can't always tell the difference between them without making some tests. Here's a portion of a post I made on the subject in 1999:
cut here

The past participle form of the verb is not uniquel
0
[nq:2]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, ... boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?[/nq]
[nq:1]There are boffins here, but what why would you expect them to be experts on grammar?[/nq]
Shouldn't that be "but what how would you expect them to be"?
0
Unfortunately my server is giving me only John Lawler's comments on Robert Lieblich's comments (not RL's original) so please forgive me if I get the attributions tangled or miss something altogether.
Thanks to both for commenting.
The two sentence types under discussion are these: a) I was flummoxed by her question.
b) It's two days later and I'm still flummoxed.
a) This morning he
0
[nq:2]I think you mean the plain old past participle, which ... call for John Lawler, whose meat and potatoes this is.[/nq]
[nq:1]Grammarians are in agreement that there is a difference between a participle and an adjective, but that difference lies in their use, not in the form of the words themselves.[/nq]
I liked your tests. However, there are a very few words where a different adjectiv
0
[nq:1]Actually I was looking for the Association of Underwater Explorers, but while I'm here I'd like to submit a grammar question to the boffins. You have got boffins here, haven't you? Or have I been misinformed again?[/nq]
If we haven't, we've sure gotta lotta wannabees.
[nq:1]My question is about passive participles those epicene grammatical entities seldom mentioned (though often hear
0
[nq:1]There are tests that distinguish between an adjective and a participle. An adjective (but not a participle) can occur with ... was closed by Harry. The last pair are both good, but have different senses, because of the ambiguity of 'closed'.[/nq]
Just a note on "close". As with "open" and "opened", the forms "close" (with a -ss, not a -z) and "closed" exist; but "close" is to my knowledg

Related Questions