0
Taka Posted 14 years ago
Grammar

Shake

What is the difference in meaning between the two below?

The man was sitting there with his legs shaking.
The man was sitting there with his legs shook.
  

Top answer

Hi, What is the difference in meaning between the two below? The man was sitting there with his legs shaking. His legs were shaking right at that time.

— Clive

  • Hi, What is the difference in meaning between the two below?
  • The man was sitting there with his legs shaking.
  • His legs were shaking right at that time.
  • The man was sitting there with his legs shook.
  • 'Shook' is not correct.
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.

17 Answers
0
Hi,

What is the difference in meaning between the two below?

The man was sitting there with his legs shaking. His legs were shaking right at that time.
The man was sitting there with his legs shook. 'Shook' is not correct. You need the past participle, 'shaken'.
0
0
Oops! Yes, of course, it's 'shaken'. Could you fix that for me, Clive? That mistake is kind of embarrassing.
CliveThis means that his legs had been shaken at some prior time.
Then, what about this?

The man was sitting there with his legs being shaken..
0
0
Hi,

with his legs shaking - Maybe he is nervous.

with his legs being shaken - Sounds like it is by some external agency, eg a special vibrating chair

Clive
0
0
I see.

Clive, do you think a past participle that modifies a noun in front always implies an event that happened at some prior time? Or you don't think it's necessarily so.

(By the way, is it impossible to make the correction for me that I asked?)
0
0
Hi,

Clive, do you think a past participle that modifies a noun in front always implies an event that happened at some prior time? Or you don't think it's necessarily so.
Consider eg I will get my teeth cleaned tomorrow.

(By the way, is it impossibl
0
0
Clive.Consider eg I will get my teeth cleaned tomorrow.
'Cleaned' here implies an event that will happen in the future just because we have 'will' and 'tomorrow'. That's easy to understand.

Well, what about this?

These fossils are found in certain layers of Earth,

If the sentences above is converted to a noun phrase, i
0
0
Hi,

'Cleaned' here implies an event that will happen in the future just because we have 'will' and 'tomorrow'. That's easy to understand.
Using future tense was my way of answering 'no' to the question that you specifically asked. You specified nothing about just dealing with certain
0
0
CliveHi, You specified nothing about just dealing with certain tenses
That was my intention. I wanted to know if past particle modifiers themselves were ambiguous in terms of tenses.
Clive ' This is a different structure. It's Present Passive.
Is it really different?

'His legs shaken' could be a conversion of 'His
0
0
Hi,

Sorry, but when I look at this thread today, I find I am losing track of it. So many backward references to earlier posts.
Allow me to pick it up from here.

Clive, do you think a past participle that modifies a noun in front always implies an event that happened at
0
0
CliveClive, do you think a past participle that modifies a noun in front always implies an event that happened at some prior time?No, I don't.
Then why wouldn't you take 'his legs shaken' as something in progress? Why do you think 'being' would be necessary in order to make it sound progressive?
0

Related Questions