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/