I gather that many on this list, and many elsewhere, have come to adopt the 
definition of verb, as Martha Kolln put it a few days ago, as "a word that has 
both present and past tense.  ([she] sometimes simply say[s], "a word that has 
both an -s and an -ing ending."

I understand the usefulness of such a definition.   It is straightforward 
and, with only a few exceptions, effective at identifying words that belong to 
the word class verb.   

My problem with this approach is that it is not of much usefulness to my 
students.   What they need to know is not whether a word belongs to the word class 
verb; they need to know whether a particular word is functioning as a verb in 
a sentence they have written.   Identifying verbs in sentences is crucial to 
editing for punctuation, for fragments and run-ons, and for subject-verb 
agreement.   

So if students write "The couple taking a walk in the park," they need to be 
able to figure out whether taking and walk are functioning as verbs in this 
"sentence."   The fact that they are words that belong to the word class verb, 
as well as to others, is not useful information in editing this sentence.   It 
seems to me that a meaning-based definition of verb will be of much more use 
for this purpose.

Of course, we may have simply arrived by a different route at a recognition 
that we are aiming at different purposes.   I am worried about helping students 
reduce the severity and quantity of error in their writing.   Others' goal is 
to provide students with a thorough understanding of how the English language 
works.

But, if there is a way the definition based on form rather than meaning can 
be useful for my purposes, I would like to learn that.   

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/