NationStates Jolt Archive

okay, so at lunch I got grammar nazi'd by my oldest kid and my husband when explaining the parts of speech to my 4 year old. We were doing the stupid ad-lib thingy at the restaurant and I needed a noun so I asked the kid and she said "what's a noun?" and so I said "it's a person, place or thing" and she said "oh" and my 6 year old said "no, mom it's a person, place, thing or idea" and I said "fine, or idea" and my husband pipes in "no, when I was in school it was a person, place, thing, idea or color" now I am like "no, it's not"

a color is an adjective right?

hubby claims (and oldest kid agrees) that sometimes colors are nouns

'Red is pretty' they said is when a color is a noun.......

and then I said "the cow is brown" and tried to say that brown is an adjective in that sentence because it describes cow which is the noun, and they said "no, they are both nouns"

on the off chance they aren't just screwing with me and I do sound like an idiot, I would like to know.

I will preface this that even though my kid is homeschooled I am NOT her grammar teacher. The reason being I had a really crappy grammar education and I know this. She has an English tutor with a masters in English so, don't worry about my idiocy breaking her....but DO worry about my idiocy in general and explain to me who is right.

help?

Red is a pretty color. Noun
The cow is brown. Adjective
The brown cow. Adjective

True, colours can be used as nouns in a sentence, but only when they're used as subjects or objects. In the sentence "the cow is brown", "brown" is a predicative (to be precise, an adjectival predicative) and thus an adjective (also called "predicative adjective").

Colours can be nouns or adjectives, depending on the context.

'Red is a pretty colour' - Noun
'The cow is brown' - Adjective

This is true of most adjectives, I imagine.


EDIT: Yeah, what Fass said about subjects and objects.

The cow is brown. Nountive.

Nope, a predicate adjective.

nountive? you are just making crap up now aren't you? :p

I pulled out little one's grammar workbook, it says nouns are naming words, verbs are action words, adjectives describe nouns and adverbs describe verbs.

my husband says it's wrong and that preschool grammar has ruined me. :eek:

'Red is pretty' here, red is a noun
the cow is brown
here, it is an adjective

Red, when it is discussing the color, will be a noun...Red is pretty, Red is the first color in the spectrum, etc.
When it describes something else, it is an adjective.


In the grammar system I use, it would be categorized as Adj:N or an adjective which functions as a noun.

okay, so at lunch I got grammar nazi'd by my oldest kid and my husband when explaining the parts of speech to my 4 year old. We were doing the stupid ad-lib thingy at the restaurant and I needed a noun so I asked the kid and she said "what's a noun?" and so I said "it's a person, place or thing" and she said "oh" and my 6 year old said "no, mom it's a person, place, thing or idea" and I said "fine, or idea" and my husband pipes in "no, when I was in school it was a person, place, thing, idea or color" now I am like "no, it's not"

a color is an adjective right?

hubby claims (and oldest kid agrees) that sometimes colors are nouns

'Red is pretty' they said is when a color is a noun.......

and then I said "the cow is brown" and tried to say that brown is an adjective in that sentence because it describes cow which is the noun, and they said "no, they are both nouns"

on the off chance they aren't just screwing with me and I do sound like an idiot, I would like to know.

I will preface this that even though my kid is homeschooled I am NOT her grammar teacher. The reason being I had a really crappy grammar education and I know this. She has an English tutor with a masters in English so, don't worry about my idiocy breaking her....but DO worry about my idiocy in general and explain to me who is right.

help?

A color can rarely be an noun. Gold is one of the few possibilities. You might see a red wall and say "look at all the red!" and then it would be a noun, but I'm not sure this sentence is correct in its use.

okay, so at lunch I got grammar nazi'd by my oldest kid and my husband when explaining the parts of speech to my 4 year old. We were doing the stupid ad-lib thingy at the restaurant and I needed a noun so I asked the kid and she said "what's a noun?" and so I said "it's a person, place or thing" and she said "oh" and my 6 year old said "no, mom it's a person, place, thing or idea" and I said "fine, or idea" and my husband pipes in "no, when I was in school it was a person, place, thing, idea or color" now I am like "no, it's not"

a color is an adjective right?

hubby claims (and oldest kid agrees) that sometimes colors are nouns

'Red is pretty' they said is when a color is a noun.......

and then I said "the cow is brown" and tried to say that brown is an adjective in that sentence because it describes cow which is the noun, and they said "no, they are both nouns"

on the off chance they aren't just screwing with me and I do sound like an idiot, I would like to know.

I will preface this that even though my kid is homeschooled I am NOT her grammar teacher. The reason being I had a really crappy grammar education and I know this. She has an English tutor with a masters in English so, don't worry about my idiocy breaking her....but DO worry about my idiocy in general and explain to me who is right.

help?

"A noun names a person, place, thing, idea, quality, or condition..."

taken from The Beacon Handbook, 6th Ed., written by Robert Perrin (the guy who taught me the most about grammar)

So yeah, a color can be a noun. A color would certainly be a quality in some instances, and wouldn't have to function as an adjective to be so.

A colour is an adjective, in terms of "those shoes are red", but because of the way English works, you can also use it like a noun to describe it as an adjective.

"Black is beautiful" etc. etc.

Smunkee, for more elucidation on predicatives, you can read this wiki on copulae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula).

Nouns are the objects that either do something or have something done to them.

Nouns are the objects that either do something or have something done to them.

Objects have things done with or to them, but subjects are the things doing them (either direct or indirect). Using "object" in this context to mean "thing" can just be confusing.

Objects have things done with or to them, but subjects are the things doing them (either direct or indirect). Using "object" in this context to mean "thing" can just be confusing.It is different when English is your mother tongue. We typically do not learn about direct/indirect/other objects until learning a foreign language. Until then, it is just another part of the predicate.

It is different when English is your mother tongue.

No, it isn't. It just beds for confusion.

We typically do not learn about direct/indirect/other objects until learning a foreign language. Until then, it is just another part of the predicate.

Then your education in your own language is severely delayed and hampered.

Nouns are the objects that either do something or have something done to them.
Erm. What about abstract nouns?

No, it isn't. It just beds for confusion.

Then your education in your own language is severely delayed and hampered.There has to be some explanation why we are among the worst speakers of our own ideas.

First, tell your lovely children and wonderful husband to get over themselves. You were right from the beginning. A noun names a person, place or thing. Ideas and colors fall under "things," even though they are not physical objects, because they are neither persons nor places. Geez. :rolleyes:

Next, colors are both adjectives and nouns, depending on the context, i.e.:

-- The minimalist painting was a broad expanse of red. ("Red" is a noun here.)

-- It is a picture of a red wall. ("Red" is an adjective here.)

HOWEVER, what part of speech a word falls under is typically determined by its PRIMARY usage. In this case, color words are primarily used as adjectives, therefore, they are listed as adjectives when describing the parts of speech. If one wants to be completely thorough, one should attach an asterisk for "sometimes can be used as a noun."

For your reference, some examples from some basic teaching sites (note these sites list colors under adjectives):

http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/parts-of-speech_1.htm
http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/parts-of-speech_3.htm
http://depts.gallaudet.edu/englishworks/grammar/partsofspeech.html#adjectives

And from good old Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry:
1red
Pronunciation:
\?red\
Function:
adjective
Inflected Form(s):
red·der; red·dest
Etymology:
Middle English, from Old English r?ad; akin to Old High German r?t red, Latin ruber & rufus, Greek erythros
Date:
before 12th century
1 a: of the color red b: having red as a distinguishing color2 a (1): flushed especially with anger or embarrassment (2): ruddy, florid (3): being or having skin of a coppery hue b: bloodshot <eyes red from crying> c: being in the color range between a moderate orange and russet or bay d: tinged with red : reddish3: heated to redness : glowing4 a: inciting or endorsing radical social or political change especially by force boften capitalized : communist coften capitalized : of or relating to a communist country and especially to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
— red in tooth and claw
: characterized by or displaying brutal emotion or violent behavior
Main Entry:
2red
Function:
noun
Date:
before 12th century
1: a color whose hue resembles that of blood or of the ruby or is that of the long-wave extreme of the visible spectrum2: red clothing <the lady in red>3: one that is of a red or reddish color: as a: red wine b: an animal with a red or reddish coat4 a: a pigment or dye that colors red b: a shade or tint of red5 a: one who advocates the violent overthrow of an existing social or political order bcapitalized : communist6[from the bookkeeping practice of entering debit items in red ink] : the condition of showing a loss —usually used with the<in the red> — compare black

nountive? you are just making crap up now aren't you? :p

I pulled out little one's grammar workbook, it says nouns are naming words, verbs are action words, adjectives describe nouns and adverbs describe verbs.

my husband says it's wrong and that preschool grammar has ruined me. :eek:

Although your little one's grammar workbook is not complete (adverbs also modify adjectives, for instance), your husband is wrong. Google English grammar, and you will get plenty of university sites and other sites for teachers (lesson plans and so forth) that say so.

help?

The way I see it, whether something is a noun depends on its role in a sentence. Trying to list all the things that can be nouns seems a bit futile.

A noun is something that can be used as a subject, object or indirect object (sorry if I missed anything). Whereas a verb describes how these things are related to each other. An adjective, I suppose, is a way to make a noun more specific (e.g. 'brown dog' is more specific than just 'dog').

It is different when English is your mother tongue. We typically do not learn about direct/indirect/other objects until learning a foreign language. Until then, it is just another part of the predicate.
Speak for yourself, Posi. Public School 90, in Jamaica, Queens, NYC, covered every conceivable nuance of English parts of speech over 6 years, with lots of testing to boot. I made sentence diagrams in that school that looked like circuit board schematics. One of the very first things they taught us -- in the first grade -- was the difference between the object of a sentence and the subject of a sentence. :rolleyes:

There has to be some explanation why we are among the worst speakers of our own ideas.
Again, speak for yourself. :p

The way I see it, whether something is a noun depends on its role in a sentence. Trying to list all the things that can be nouns seems a bit futile.

A noun is something that can be used as a subject, object or indirect object (sorry if I missed anything). Whereas a verb describes how these things are related to each other. An adjective, I suppose, is a way to make a noun more specific (e.g. 'brown dog' is more specific than just 'dog').
There is no way that "swimmingly" can be a noun, and there is no way that "apple" can be anything but a noun.

And no, verbs do not describe how thing are related to each other. There are lots and lots of different kinds of words that do that.

Look, I listed for Smunkee just two English grammar instructional sites, very basic ones. Why don't we all look at them, eh? That way we can see what the parts of speech actually are and what they actually do.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for any answer regarding English grammar to contain the phrase "I suppose." The rules are clear and are available for the searching.

Again, speak for yourself. :pNo! I shall speak for all of us! Reality will become whatever I say it is!

There is no way that "swimmingly" can be a noun, and there is no way that "apple" can be anything but a noun.

Pfft! English is known for its ability to verb nouns. "Apple" could easily be verbed of one wanted to. I quote my favourite example of noun-verbing from The Simpsons when Jimbo, after finding out Lisa had disguised herself as a boy to get into advanced maths classes, exclaims: "We've been yentled!"

Pfft! English is known for its ability to verb nouns. "Apple" could easily be verbed of one wanted to. I quote my favourite example of noun-verbing from The Simpsons when Jimbo, after finding out Lisa had disguised herself as a boy to get into advanced maths classes, exclaims: "We've been yentled!"I love verbing nouns. Even if there is a perfectly acceptable verb, the noun tends of convey the meaning better. I also tends to be shorter to boot.

First, tell your lovely children and wonderful husband to get over themselves. You were right from the beginning. A noun names a person, place or thing. Ideas and colors fall under "things," even though they are not physical objects, because they are neither persons nor places. Geez. :rolleyes:

Next, colors are both adjectives and nouns, depending on the context, i.e.:

-- The minimalist painting was a broad expanse of red. ("Red" is a noun here.)

-- It is a picture of a red wall. ("Red" is an adjective here.)

HOWEVER, what part of speech a word falls under is typically determined by its PRIMARY usage. In this case, color words are primarily used as adjectives, therefore, they are listed as adjectives when describing the parts of speech. If one wants to be completely thorough, one should attach an asterisk for "sometimes can be used as a noun."

For your reference, some examples from some basic teaching sites (note these sites list colors under adjectives):

http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/parts-of-speech_1.htm
http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/parts-of-speech_3.htm
http://depts.gallaudet.edu/englishworks/grammar/partsofspeech.html#adjectives

And from good old Merriam-Webster:

Ctrl C Ctrl V *emails to hubby and children*

HA!

Speak for yourself, Posi. Public School 90, in Jamaica, Queens, NYC, covered every conceivable nuance of English parts of speech over 6 years, with lots of testing to boot. I made sentence diagrams in that school that looked like circuit board schematics. One of the very first things they taught us -- in the first grade -- was the difference between the object of a sentence and the subject of a sentence. :rolleyes::eek: That is cruel.

In the first grade, I learned how to spell my name, add, subtract, fractions (mmm, chocolate math), and lip sync. The lattest has proven the most valuable as my school was one of those "music makes students smarter" schools.

For all our resident experts and nerds, here are some toys I just found while puttering about:

http://www.world-english.org/

http://www.nonstopenglish.com/allexercises/grammar/index-006.asp

:)

Pfft! English is known for its ability to verb nouns. "Apple" could easily be verbed of one wanted to. I quote my favourite example of noun-verbing from The Simpsons when Jimbo, after finding out Lisa had disguised herself as a boy to get into advanced maths classes, exclaims: "We've been yentled!"
English is also known for having a high number of speakers who are incoherent idiots babbling nonsense all day long, as you are all too fond of pointing out. I decline to encourage such errors because, in the long run, it would only encourage you to keep abusing us. :p

English is also known for having a high number of speakers who are incoherent idiots babbling nonsense all day long, as you are all too fond of pointing out. I decline to encourage such errors because, in the long run, it would only encourage you to keep abusing us. :p

There is nothing erroneous in verbing nouns, and no matter what you do, I'll always be able to abuse you since you can't escape the sad fact that you speak English.

No! I shall speak for all of us! Reality will become whatever I say it is!
*Gives Posi a puzzle to play with; steers Posi towards out of the way corner; carries on with day* ;)

What about numbers; do they follow the same rules? For instance,

"One is a number greater than Zero" has one as a noun
"There was one apple left" has one as an adjective

:eek: That is cruel.

In the first grade, I learned how to spell my name, add, subtract, fractions (mmm, chocolate math), and lip sync. The lattest has proven the most valuable as my school was one of those "music makes students smarter" schools.
You poor thing. I learned how to spell my name in kindergarten, as well as how to spell out my home address and my parents' names, and other words, too. My kindergarten teachers also taught us how to tell time, draw pictures, tie our shoes, and got us started on vocabulary. That left plenty of time for basic grammar in the first grade, alongside the basic math.

And...lip syncing? At PS 90, we learned music by actually singing and actually playing the recorder (just like in South Park).

There is nothing erroneous in verbing nouns, and no matter what you do, I'll always be able to abuse you since you can't escape the sad fact that you speak English.
OK, Fass, you invent the sex act, and I'll call it by its name: to apple a person. And we'll call what you do "to Fass." ;)

OK, Fass, you invent the sex act, and I'll call it by its name: to apple a person.

How about inserting one's scrotum into an orifice other than the mouth (since the latter is called tea-bagging already)? It sort of does look like an apple then.

And we'll call what you do "to Fass." ;)

"Don't make me fass you!" It works.

What about numbers; do they follow the same rules? For instance,

"One is a number greater than Zero" has one as a noun
"There was one apple left" has one as an adjective

Yes. And, by the way, the first example also has "zero" as a noun.

A site with more advanced information:

http://www.davidappleyard.com/english/grammar.htm

How about inserting one's scrotum into an orifice other than the mouth (since the latter is called tea-bagging already)? It sort of does look like an apple then.
I'll take your word for it.


"Don't make me fass you!" It works.
Done and done. :D

How about inserting one's scrotum into an orifice other than the mouth (since the latter is called tea-bagging already)? It sort of does look like an apple then.Tea-bagging is resting your testicles on someone's forehead.

Tea-bagging is resting your testicles on someone's forehead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging

Nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging

Nope.Wikipedia is wrong!

Of course being slang, meaning tends to vary more than it would for an element of the proper language.

Wikipedia is wrong!

The definition is referenced.

Of course being slang, meaning tends to vary more than it would for an element of the proper language.

That's one way of admitting you were wrong, yes.

The definition is referenced.

That's one way of admitting you were wrong, yes.I follow this definition. http://lyricwiki.org/Ludacris:T-Baggin%27

As do many people.

Tea-bagging is resting your testicles on someone's forehead.

no it isn't. Why would you even do that?

no it isn't. Why would you even do that?Why would you put them in someone's mouth? Why would you risk getting your testicles bitten like that?

I follow this definition. http://lyricwiki.org/Ludacris:T-Baggin%27

As do many people.

You're all wrong as teabagging is putting the scrotum on someone's face or in their mouths. Not just the forehead. Amateurs.

I blame myself for this, for issuing the "apple as verb" challenge to Fass.

No, wait, I'll blame Fass for it instead.

Why would you put them in someone's mouth?

Why not? It feels great.

Why would you risk getting your testicles bitten like that?

They don't get bitten (unless you want to) just like you cock doesn't get bitten during a blowjob (unless you want to).

They don't get bitten (unless you want to) just like you cock doesn't get bitten during a blowjob (unless you want to).Blowjobs tend not to be forced. The person wants the cock in their mouth.

Blowjobs tend not to be forced. The person wants the cock in their mouth.

Teabagging tends not to be forced. The person wants the balls in their mouth.

Why would you put them in someone's mouth? Why would you risk getting your testicles bitten like that?

one would assume that if you are going to willingly have any of your body near or in someone's mouth that you trust them not to bite you *unless you want to be bitten.

If you are going to bring out "pop-culture" reference though, I should point out a conversation from sex in the city

"I have a tea bag problem"
"oh, honey, just breathe through your nose"

:p I laughed, until I realized I was sitting next to people that I would have to explain this to, then I turned red and muttered something about tea and left the room.

Teabagging tends not to be forced. The person wants the balls in their mouth.You and I teabag for very different reasons.

There is no way that "swimmingly" can be a noun, and there is no way that "apple" can be anything but a noun...

The child has apple cheeks? Apple functions as an adjective here, describing the type of cheeks the child has.

Tea-bagging is resting your testicles on someone's forehead.
You mean roman helmet? Balls on the forehead, cock down the nose?
You and I teabag for very different reasons.roman helmet and arabian goggles are for humiliation. Putting your balls in someones mouth is generally for pleasure.

You mean roman helmet? Balls on the forehead, cock down the nose?
roman helmet and arabian goggles are for humiliation. Putting your balls in someones mouth is generally for pleasure.*leaves conversation*

noun
· n. Grammar a word (other than a pronoun) used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things (common noun), or to name a particular one of these (proper noun).
– DERIVATIVES nounal adj.
– ORIGIN ME: from Anglo-Norman Fr., from L. nomen ‘name’.

From the Oxford English Dictionary

We invented the language - I do of course realise Webster may have a different view.

But it's colour... :(

okay, so at lunch I got grammar nazi'd by my oldest kid and my husband when explaining the parts of speech to my 4 year old. We were doing the stupid ad-lib thingy at the restaurant and I needed a noun so I asked the kid and she said "what's a noun?" and so I said "it's a person, place or thing" and she said "oh" and my 6 year old said "no, mom it's a person, place, thing or idea" and I said "fine, or idea" and my husband pipes in "no, when I was in school it was a person, place, thing, idea or color" now I am like "no, it's not"

a color is an adjective right?.

I'm no expert. To me, color is is an adjective almost always.
"Blood is red" ... adjective.
"Red rag to a bull" ... of course.

"I needed a colour to show anger in my picture, so I chose the red" ... perhaps it's a noun. But only because "the red" has already been defined as one member of a class, colours. I.e. it is a thing not a property.

Perhaps there's an implicit noun in there. "Red pencil" or "Red paint."

hubby claims (and oldest kid agrees) that sometimes colors are nouns

'Red is pretty' they said is when a color is a noun.......

Yep. Implicit noun it is. "The colour red is pretty."

By the way, I have no idea what I'm talking about. I was never taught formal grammar, and I only ever improve my grammar when I am explicitly corrected by someone else.

"Implicit noun" is just my choice of words for how it seems to me.

help?

You don't need help. You express yourself with admirable clarity.

Sorry for not reading the thread. I'm sure better-schooled grammarians than me have by now set the matter to rest.

Just remember this: grammar nazis are hoplelessly confused by a snappy pun. "Noun" is only one letter different from "Nun" and I'm sure there's a killer pun there somewhere.

There is nothing erroneous in verbing nouns, and no matter what you do, I'll always be able to abuse you since you can't escape the sad fact that you speak English.

Corrected:

There is erroneous nothing in nouning verbs, and it matters not what you do, I'll ability always abusing you since can't you sad to escape the facting of the English speak.

There! Now you sound like a real Swede!

Always with the help to glad giving.

The way I got taught it was that a noun is simply a name for something.

'to debate' is a verb.

"The debating on NSG was inane" - and here it is used as (part of) a noun.

Doesn't anyone think of the numbers anymore? Those pretty nouns! Wail! :D

I'm sure it has been said already, but it's worth reinforcing.

Colors are generally adjectives, however anything is a noun when it is a subject. For example, the word "for" is traditionally either a preposition or a coordinating conjunction (and or nor but yet for [and sometimes 'so']), however it can serve as the subject of a sentence: "For serves as the subject of this sentence."

The word "is" is an intransitive verb of incomplete predication. Unlike transitive verbs, which require a direct object (John rocks the boat, rocks being the verb and boat being the direct object), or intransitive verbs, which are simply complete (John digs, digs being the intransitive verb), words like "is" require either a predicate noun or a predicate adjective. In the case of "The cow is brown," brown is a predicate adjective. If you make brown the subject, then it is a noun. If it is not proceeding an "is" or an "are" or anything of that type, then it is simply an adjective.

Hope this helps! :)

The way I got taught it was that a noun is simply a name for something.

'to debate' is a verb.

"The debating on NSG was inane" - and here it is used as (part of) a noun.

Actually, "to debate" is a verbal. Specifically, it is an infinitive, which is a noun.

There is no way that "swimmingly" can be a noun, and there is no way that "apple" can be anything but a noun.

Please, don't say things you're not sure of. There is no word in or outside of the English language that cannot be the subject of a sentence.

"Fdsahfjdshafhdsa is not a word."

Fdsahfjdshafhdsa just became the subject. The subject is a noun. Always.

"Swimmingly is usually an adverb." In that sentence, however, it is a noun!

:O

Actually, "to debate" is a verbal. Specifically, it is an infinitive, which is a noun.Oh shush. I wrote out the infinitive rather than conjugate it into all its various forms as a verb.

noun
· n. Grammar a word (other than a pronoun) used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things (common noun), or to name a particular one of these (proper noun).
– DERIVATIVES nounal adj.
– ORIGIN ME: from Anglo-Norman Fr., from L. nomen ‘name’.

From the Oxford English Dictionary

We invented the language - I do of course realise Webster may have a different view.
While it may be true that you "invented" the language, grammar still came in after said creation to describe what was happening. That definition is a lacking one, as it ignores abstract concepts such as "love" or "desire" or "hatred"

I'm no expert. To me, color is is an adjective almost always.
"Blood is red" ... adjective.
"Red rag to a bull" ... of course.

"I needed a colour to show anger in my picture, so I chose the red" ... perhaps it's a noun. But only because "the red" has already been defined as one member of a class, colours. I.e. it is a thing not a property.

Perhaps there's an implicit noun in there. "Red pencil" or "Red paint."



Yep. Implicit noun it is. "The colour red is pretty." In that case, color is an adjective which is modifying the noun "red". It would be parsed as N:adj. Maybe I'll draw out a few line diagrams later....



Doesn't anyone think of the numbers anymore? Those pretty nouns! Wail! :DSometimes nouns, sometimes determiners (cardinal or ordinal numbers)

I'm sure it has been said already, but it's worth reinforcing.

Colors are generally adjectives, however anything is a noun when it is a subject. For example, the word "for" is traditionally either a preposition or a coordinating conjunction (and or nor but yet for [and sometimes 'so']), however it can serve as the subject of a sentence: "For serves as the subject of this sentence."In that case, the For should be placed in quotes as it does not have a direct meaning within the sentence.
"For" serves as the subject of this sentence

granted, it is still a noun...well, a PrepPh:N, but a noun in character none the less

The word "is" is an intransitive verb of incomplete predication. Unlike transitive verbs, which require a direct object (John rocks the boat, rocks being the verb and boat being the direct object), or intransitive verbs, which are simply complete (John digs, digs being the intransitive verb), words like "is" require either a predicate noun or a predicate adjective. In the case of "The cow is brown," brown is a predicate adjective. If you make brown the subject, then it is a noun. If it is not proceeding an "is" or an "are" or anything of that type, then it is simply an adjective.
Not sure which system you learned under, so this could be totally off, but the system I know classifies 6 verb types: VI (intransitive) VL (linking), VT (one-place transitive), Vc (calling, a two place trasitive where the second non-adverbial segment renames or describes the first), Vg (giving, a two place transitive where one segment is something given, an the other is the recipient) and BE verbs (verbs which are a derivative of To Be)
In this example, "is" and "are" would be BE verbs

Not sure which system you learned under, so this could be totally off, but the system I know classifies 6 verb types: VI (intransitive) VL (linking), VT (one-place transitive), Vc (calling, a two place trasitive where the second non-adverbial segment renames or describes the first), Vg (giving, a two place transitive where one segment is something given, an the other is the recipient) and BE verbs (verbs which are a derivative of To Be)
In this example, "is" and "are" would be BE verbs

I'm interested in this system. The only types we learned about were transitive, intransitive and intransitive of incomplete predication. Could you explain?

I'm interested in this system. The only types we learned about were transitive, intransitive and intransitive of incomplete predication. Could you explain?
It's the system Max Morenberg uses, just incase I do a poor job explaining this...his book is Doing Grammar

He outlines six core verbs: intransitive, linking, transitive, Vg, Vc, and BE.
I'll give a quick thing about the ones that are shared in the system you mentioned
Intransitive verbs can end sentences or can be followed by adverbs (including adverbs, adverbial phrases, and prepositional phrases functioning adverbially)
EX (verb bolded): The mayor spoke
The baby cried softy
Amelia Erhardt's plane disappeared on a transcontinental flight

The verb formula looks like this: NP VI (adv)

Linking verbs
must be followed by either nouns or adjectives (again, either individual words or phrasal). They include only a few verbs, the sensory verbs (taste, smell, sound, look, and feel) as well as seem, become, remain, and a few others. the post-verb constituent renames or describes the subject
EX: The president looked weary
Silas remained an honest man

The verb formula looks like this: NP VL [NP:PredN or Adj:PredAdj]

Transitive verbs
will be followed by noun phrases that function as direct objects
sentences with transitive verbs can be made passive

EX: The secretary typed the letter
President Clinton supported the health care bill

The verb formula looks like this: NP VT NP: DObj

Two Place Transitives
-Vg
Vg verbs are followed by both a direct and an indirect object
EX: The school board gave the teachers a raise
The florist sent the roses to her husband

The verb formula looks like this: NP Vg [NP:IObj NP: DObj or NP: DObj {to or for} NP: IObj]

-Vc
Vc verbs are followed by direct objects and object compliments

EX: Republicans consider Democrats big spenders
Diana found the royal title to be a prison
Young fans deem Tupac a great poet

The verb formula looks like this: NP Vc NP: DObj [NP:ObjComp or AdjPh:ObjComp or InfPh:ObjComp]

BE verbs
Followed by an adjective, noun, or adverb of place
often included in linking verbs
Includes the eight forms of BE: be, is, am, are, was, were, been, being
Like linking verbs, it may be followed by predicate adjectives and nouns. Unlike linking verbs, it may also be followed by an adverb of place

EX: Marilyn Monroe was insecure (Adj:PredAdj)
The post office is down the road (PrepPh:Adv-Place)

The verb formula looks like this: NP BE [NP:PredN or Adj:PredAdj or Adv:PredAdv]



Morenberg does recognize that two further categories could be added:semitransitive and a subclass of Vg

To clarify the random letters appearing:
NP=Noun Phrase
PrepPh=Prepositional phrase

Big words, smart people.

Fuck this. *flees*

The child has apple cheeks? Apple functions as an adjective here, describing the type of cheeks the child has.
All right, fine. I'll concede that. Now make a noun out of "swimmingly." :p

noun
· n. Grammar a word (other than a pronoun) used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things (common noun), or to name a particular one of these (proper noun).
– DERIVATIVES nounal adj.
– ORIGIN ME: from Anglo-Norman Fr., from L. nomen ‘name’.

From the Oxford English Dictionary

We invented the language - I do of course realise Webster may have a different view.
I posted Webster's definition. It is not functionally different, just longer.

You (British) invented the language (:rolleyes:), but we (Americans) have been speaking it just as long. Remember where we originally came from (heh, you invented us, too; useless to deny it).

Please, don't say things you're not sure of. There is no word in or outside of the English language that cannot be the subject of a sentence.

"Fdsahfjdshafhdsa is not a word."

Fdsahfjdshafhdsa just became the subject. The subject is a noun. Always.

"Swimmingly is usually an adverb." In that sentence, however, it is a noun!

:O
I was sure. I was just mistaken. I've admitted it.

But I dispute your claim that the subject must always be a noun. Just because a non-noun does the work of a noun in a sentence does not make it a noun. There are standard (though less common) usages in which words change from noun to adjective (etc) or vice versa, but I do not agree that it is mandatory. I also do not agree that it is merely the structure of the sentence that determines this.

In your example, "swimmingly" is the subject, but I disagree that this makes it a noun. It is a special case of a non-noun doing the work of a noun. There is a term for this, but I lost my link to a particular site that went into this in detail. It was a site for a TEFL training school that gave its rather demanding application test online. This instance, as well as other arcane exceptions to standard rules of English grammar, were covered and analyzed as part of it (since teachers would be expected to know this stuff).

If I can find it again, I will post it. It's a fun test to take.

EDIT: It was The Caledonian School in Prague. Unfortunately, they rebuilt their website, and I can't figure how to navigate to pages for people applying for teaching jobs with them. That was where the test used to be, but since I can't find it, I don't have a handy means of showing what I'm talking about.

It's not on point, but if anyone wants to try to navigate the site its:
http://www.caledonianschool.com/html/

I was sure. I was just mistaken. I've admitted it.

But I dispute your claim that the subject must always be a noun. Just because a non-noun does the work of a noun in a sentence does not make it a noun. There are standard (though less common) usages in which words change from noun to adjective (etc) or vice versa, but I do not agree that it is mandatory. I also do not agree that it is merely the structure of the sentence that determines this.

In your example, "swimmingly" is the subject, but I disagree that this makes it a noun. It is a special case of a non-noun doing the work of a noun. There is a term for this, but I lost my link to a particular site that went into this in detail. It was a site for a TEFL training school that gave its rather demanding application test online. This instance, as well as other arcane exceptions to standard rules of English grammar, were covered and analyzed as part of it (since teachers would be expected to know this stuff).

If I can find it again, I will post it. It's a fun test to take.

Uhh, use-mention distinction?

Uhh, use-mention distinction?

Possibly that's what it's called. I don't know. Without either a link or a definite term to search for, I could spend weeks scanning the web to match my thought to a text book source. Oh, well.