Verbs: 7 Confusions

Verbs. They seem so simple, yet they can cause so much head scratching. Here is my attempt to clear up some of the confusion:

Confusion #1: Linking Verbs
Many students don’t know that words like is, are, am, was, be, and been are verbs. These are worker-bee words, but what do they do? Here’s a simple explanation: a Linking Verb acts like an equals sign.

This soccer game is exciting!
This soccer game = exciting.

I am a huge fan.
I = a huge fan.

Linking Verbs are the only type of main verb that does not show action. Rather, they join the subject to a noun or an adjective that identifies or describes it. This is what is meant by “state of being.” And here’s some great news: There’s only about 20 of them in the English language. I say “about” because there are varying opinions on the exact list, but there seems to be consensus on these:

Forms of be: is, are, am, was, were, be, being, been
Sense words: feel, appear, look, smell, taste, sound
State of being: seem, become, grow, stay, turn, remain, prove

Watch the video: Linking Verbs

Confusion #2: “Be Verbs” that aren’t Linking Verbs
The second and third groups above can also be action verbs, but it’s common to hear that forms of be are always linking verbs. Hm. What about this sentence?

The lion is chasing the antelope.

Here we have is working as a helping verb with chasing to form the present continuous tense. Remember: to decide if a verb is linking, we must use the “equals sign” test. Here’s another example:

Harriett is home.

Saying Harriet = home is not quite right. Home does not identify her, nor does it describe her. It tells us where she is. This is what we call an adverbial noun. It doesn’t function as a direct object, so that makes is an intransitive complete verb in this context. It expresses action, but it does not transfer the action to an object. Weird! A way to make sense of this is to substitute exists for is, so the subject and intransitive complete verb together would be Harriett exists.

Confusion #3: Transitive vs. Intransitive Verbs
It’s one thing to show action and another to transfer it. Transitive verbs work with a direct object that “receives” the action. If there is not a direct object, the verb is intransitive. To determine if a verb is transitive, insert what? or whom? into the sentence. For example:

Jeanne balanced her checkbook.
Jeanne balanced what?
checkbook (the direct object of the transitive verb balanced).

Lyle called Stephanie for the 14th time.
Lyle called whom?
Stephanie (the direct object of the transitive verb called).

The weather was hot, so I drank from the stream.

I drank what?
I drank whom?

The questions are not answered. The prepositional phrase from the stream answers the question where, but this is not the same thing. So in this case, the verb drank is intransitive complete because a prepositional phrase can never be a direct object–a good rule to know!

Side Note: Refer back to the sentence in the previous section: Harriett is home. Let’s change it to Harriett is at home. Now the verb is is followed by the prepositional phrase at home. Does this change the status of is? No, it remains intransitive complete.

Watch the video: Transitive and Intransitive Verbs

Confusion #4: Infinitives
Along with gerunds and participles (see below), infinitives are known as verbals, “words formed from verbs that don’t act as verbs.” Infinitives are almost always preceded by to, e.g. to swim, to sing, to read, etc. Since they can function as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs, they can be quite confusing!

Infinitive as a noun:
Trevor loves to eat.
The infinitive is the direct object of the verb loves.

Infinitive as an adjective:
Trevor has a sandwich to eat.
The infinitive describes the noun sandwich.

Infinitive as an adverb:
Trevor must eat to survive.
The infinitive modifies the verb eat.

Watch the video: Infinitives

Confusion #5: Infinitives without “To”
To-less infinitives, also known as “bare infinitives” will often show up after the verbs feel, hear, help, let, make, see, and watch.

Trevor helped me make dinner.
To is not needed before make, but the infinitive phrase make dinner still functions as a noun and the direct object of the verb helped. This makes we the indirect object. Here’s a similar example:

He helped me understand the recipe.
To is not needed before understand.

Sometimes bare infinitives are hard to spot because adding to back in would be awkward:

He watched me stir the soup.
We would never say to stir the soup in this context, yet stir the soup is still an infinitive phrase functioning as a noun and direct object. Keep an eye out for feel, hear, help, let, make, see, and watch. They signal that a bare infinitive may follow!

Confusion #6: Gerunds
Another kind of verbal, gerunds are famous for always ending in ing and functioning as nouns. Because nouns can do lots of jobs in a sentence, gerunds can show up all over the place.

A gerund as the subject of the sentence:
Eating will make Trevor very happy.

A gerund as a direct object:
Trevor loves eating.

A gerund as an indirect object:
Trevor gives eating all of his attention.

A gerund as the object of a preposition.
He is devoted to eating.

Watch the video: Gerunds

Confusion #7: Participles
The third and final verbal, participles function as adjectives and often end in ed, en, or ing.

The rising sun reminded Trevor it was time for breakfast.

Trevor would not eat the rotten fruit.

A participial phrase functioning as an adjective describing Trevor:
Removing his heavy coat, Trevor sat down to gorge himself.

Watch the video: Participles

What do you find confusing about verbs? Please register for the blog and leave comments!

Look Inside Language

In a research paper entitled Romancing Our Readers, Dr. Abigail Konopasky points out that: up until 4th grade a student’s central literacy job is to memorize; she must read a relatively large number of words by ‘sight’ and then be able to reproduce the spelling of those words in her writing. The paper goes on to explain that the focus shifts in upper elementary school. Instead of learning to read, the student’s job becomes reading to learn. While memorizing is still important, the larger goal is analyzing, or as explained in a report by the Annie E. Casey Foundation: using their skills to gain more information in subjects such as math and science, to solve problems, to think critically about what they are learning, and to act upon and share that knowledge in the world around them.

To support our young readers with these new essential tasks, it’s helpful to understand what is happening at the word level. Dr. Konopasky points out that in Grade 4, many of the new words being introduced are actually in a new language. The vast majority of monosyllabic (one-syllable) English words and quite a few disyllabic (two-syllable) English words are from the Germanic language family (via the Anglo-Saxons). These are words that describe our everyday, concrete activities, words that show up in elementary school readers. Meanwhile, the majority of multisyllabic English words are from the Romance language family (mainly via French, Italian, Spanish and Latin).

She continues: a student reading Charlotte’s Web, by E.B. White, must navigate perspiration, commotion, endure, approximate, salutations, gullible, exertion, and other highly descriptive root words. A student reading Number the Stars, by Lois Lowry, commonly taught in grade 5, must make sense of exasperated, imperious, belligerent, impassive, residential, intricate, designate, and many others. The root words have arrived!

So our K-3 students live mostly in the Anglo-Saxon world of everyday words. The spellings may be irregular, but the meanings are generally simple. Romance words, by contrast, are harder to comprehend, but they offer a compelling opportunity. Here’s Dr. Konopasky again: Fortunately, the characteristic that makes Romance vocabulary so different from Germanic vocabulary also makes it teachable: its root structure. All of these Romance words can be broken down into parts; they can be analyzed.

A New Way of Seeing Words
Teaching our students to analyze words pays numerous dividends. First, it requires them to slow down. Tinkering with roots is a powerful antidote to the bad habits born of the perpetually on-screen lifestyle. The new habit is all about investigating, giving text some time.

Secondly, the same roots can show up in numerous words, so a reader can borrow meaning from one to help unpack another. For example, a student can use invisible “not able to be seen” to shed light on provisions,the results of looking ahead”. If you are pro-vising “forward looking,” you will have the stuff you need for your journey. On the other hand, if you don’t look ahead, you will need to improvise. The extra prefix im “not” steers the word to a new place. Notice that we can teach word analysis with relatively simple words. It’s all about helping the students get comfortable with the process. It’s no big deal. It’s what we do. And pretty soon, whole vistas of words can come to life. This is how vocabulary is acquired exponentially!

Seeing Words:

And it’s not only possible to associate words within a family; we can also make connections with other families that share common meanings.

More Seeing Words:

So many words about seeing, and so much to see! The benefits keep piling up. Looking at root structure also supports spelling. Why does collaborate have two l’s? Because of a doubling rule that sometimes works? No, because the prefix col “together” ends with an l, and the base root labor “work” starts with one. That’s why!

But most of all, working with roots builds word curiosity and helps students take on a sense of authority with English. It’s all about “learning to fish”, having command of the academic process, reading to learn. Let’s help our young readers develop the eyesight to look inside language!

Impertinent Lieutenant Plays Tennis with Tenacity

Hold on! I have an exceptional root to share with you. It shows up in various spellings like tain, ten, tent, and tin, and means “hold, reach, occupy, persist, remain, retain, grasp.” In one form or another, it’s all about holding.

Let’s look at impertinent. What’s the logic of this word? For starters, it maps back to pertain, “be appropriate, related, or applicable”. The prefix per “through” modifies the base root tain to create the sense “to hold through”. The adjective pertinent, “relevant or applicable to a particular matter”, is closely related. When it picks up the extra prefix im “not” to form impertinent, we get the sense of an idea “not holding through”, or “not relevant or applicable”. Over time this meaning also picked up a sense of deliberateness. Now it’s not just that an idea or comment is not applicable, it’s that the speaker meant it that way. Impertinent moves the focus from the message to the messenger, from not relevant to rude and disrespectful.

“Who are you talking to?” said the King, coming up to Alice, and looking at the Cat’s head with great curiosity.
“It’s a friend of mine—a Cheshire-Cat,” said Alice: “allow me to introduce it.”
“I don’t like the look of it at all,” said the King: “however, it may kiss my hand, if it likes.”
“I’d rather not,” the Cat remarked.
“Don’t be impertinent,” said the King, “and don’t look at me like that!”
From: Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, by Lewis Carrol

But if you will listen to his letter, you may perhaps be a little softened by his manner of expressing himself.”
“No, that I am sure I shall not; and I think it was very impertinent of him to write to you at all, and very hypocritical. I hate such false friends.
From: Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Next, let’s look at lieutenant. What does this word have to do with holding? The lieu, loc root means “place”, and the family includes words like milieu, locale, dislocate, and locomotive (“that which moves from place to place”). So a lieutenant is “one who holds the place of another”, a substitute or deputy. For example, an army lieutenant is put in command when the captain is absent.

Tennis players must hold a racquet, but is the sport named for this? No, the most common story describes the server hollering “tenez!”, meaning “hold, receive, take”, prior to delivering the ball. Also, the sport was originally just played with the hands and called jeu de paume, “game of the palm”. This certainly required some holding and reaching. But overall there is no consensus on the etymology of tennis. Somehow the French came up with the name and we’ve been holding onto it ever since.

Which brings us to tenacity. This is a great example of a word that really comes to light if we focus on the roots. To have tenacity is “to hold fast, to persist”. And there are many others like this. Our countenance is our composure: “that which holds us together.” An untenable argument does not hold up to scrutiny. That which is sustainable is well supported: “held up from below.” Similarly, sustenance holds us up and helps us “remain, persist.” A tenet is a belief that is held as true.

Let’s help our students become tenacious root detectives and to take hold of the logic of words!