Peter,
The problem as I see it is that we DO need to recognize "taking" as a
verb in the sentence you give. Even traditional grammar recognizes
"taking a walk in the park" as predicate like, saying that it modifies
its "implied subject" (in this case "The couple".) Most grammars these
days would call it a non-finite clause. It's a verb (whole predicate)
that has had its finiteness removed, but retains its transitivity and
its verb like meaning. We can say that it has been "downranked" into a
subordinate status, in this case as a restrictive adjectival modifier
of "the couple."
I sometimes have good luck giving three or four short sentences with
the same subject and then asking students what nuances are created by
choosing one or the other as main verb.
He limped from an old war wound.
He held his head high.
He carried the flag in the parade.
We have several solutions, and students can come to see the rhetorical
nuances involved. "Limping from an old war wound, holding his head
high, he carried the flag in the parade."
In the parade, he limped from an old war wound, holding his head high
and carrying the flag."
Limping from an old war wound, his head held high, he carried the flag
in the parade." ("His head held high" is subject-bearing, an absolute.)
We have the same sort of problem with other subordinate clauses. "The
couple that was walking in the park moved onto fifth Avenue." (relative
clause; this time finite.)
"As the couple walked through the park, we watched from a distance." An
adverbial clause, followed by a main clause, both finite.
You can ask what kinds of decisions a writer makes to make one clause
the main one and the others subordinate. The verbs don't stop being
verbs. They simply stop becoming part of the "mood element", the
subject/finite verb combination that turns a statement into a
predicating proposition (or question.)
Verbs are not just words that take certain kinds of endings. They also
draw into their orbit certain kinds of complements (like direct objects
and what traditional grammar calls subject complements, though they are
really licensed by the verb, indirect objects, and the like. Like any
main clause verb, they can draw in adverbial modifiers.) "Paul,
becoming the brother I had always hoped he would be, was the first to
express his sympathy." "Becoming" is copular/linking. "had hoped" is
past perfect and transitive, the main verb in the relative clause.
"would be" is copular/ linking. "was" is the main clause verb, both
copular and past tense. "Express" is infinitive (non-finite), but
transitive, taking "his sympathy" as direct object.
If all this seems complicated, it's a complication (richness) IN THE
LANGUAGE, not just layered into it by analysis. As a matter of fact,
it's a complexity you may find more often in speech than in writing,
which tends to put more meaning into fewer clauses.
What Martha was giving you is a way to decide what "word class" (or
"part of speech") a word belongs to. As she says, this doesn't fully
predict the way the word will act when it enters into discourse. Even
when it's not the main verb, even when it modifies a noun, it will
retain verb like qualities.
"He wounded the student with his remark." In a follow up sentence, we
might talk about "the wounding remark" or "the wounded student." One
seems active, the other passive. Even in an adjectival role, the verb
like meanings carry over.
"Selling drugs on the corner was his biggest mistake." Even here, where
"selling drugs on the corner" is acting as main clause subject, in a
clearly nominal role, "selling" is still transitive, taking "drugs" as
its object and "on the corner" as an adverbial modifier. My main
quarrel with "gerund" is that it tries to classify "selling" as noun
like, when it's the whole word group that takes on the nominal role.
"Selling" doesn't stop being a verb.
One problem with purely formal tests for word class status is that they
don't account for words that seem equally in two classes: murder,
lecture, contact, surrender, flow, battle..." The class is quite large
when you pay attention to it. If you take murder out of context, is it
a verb or a noun? It passes the form tests for both. It takes tense and
it can be made plural.
Craig
>
In a message dated 8/17/06 8:21:11 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:
>>
>> When I called on "form" rather than meaning to define "verb,",I was
>> defining
>> a "part of speech": verb as a word class; I was not defining
>> predicate or
>> "main verb of the clause." To look at form in the case of all four
>> form
>> classes shows students how to use their inner grammar computer.
>>
>> The definition for words in context requires both form and function.
>> Your
>> participle example makes that case. That two-sided definition
>> represents an
>> important change from traditional school grammar.
>>
>> And, yes, it does help the students in both writing and editing stages
>> to
>> know about participles as modifiers of verbs. The idea that verb phrases
>> can
>> function within noun phrases, adjectivally, is a powerful tool for
>> writers.
>>
> Thanks, Martha, for your clarifying reply. I wonder if you or anyone on
> this list has come up with a better way of explaining to students how to
> identify
> the main verb of a clause. The traditional definition--a word that
> "expresses an action or state of being"--seems to be to be clear only to
> people who
> already know what a main verb is.
>
> For now, I'll forego any discussion of that unfortunate term "state of
> being"
> and only take a stab at an explanation that student may find more helpful
> for
> identifying main verbs that are action verbs.
>
> 1. look for a word that expresses something someone or something is
> doing
> or was doing.
> 2. if the word has a "to" in front of it, it is not a verb
> 3. if the word ends in "-ing" and doesn't have an auxilliary verb, it is
> not a verb
>
> Not a very elegant approach, but it does seem to be clearer than the
> traditional "expresses an action," which my students interpret as not
> applying to
> verbs like "sleep," "sit," "think," or "decide."
>
> Anyone have a better solution?
>
>
> Peter Adams
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
