Talk:serving

RFD discussion: January–September 2022

 * See Talk:growing.

RFV discussion: September 2022–February 2023
Rfv-sense adjective That or who serves or serve. Can any citations be provided that clearly demonstrate adjectivality? Compare Talk:spiring. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The phrase serving staff exists and turns up hundreds, maybe thousands of hits, so I think this one qualifies as an adjective too. One site even uses the phrase "kitchen and serving staff". — Soap — 00:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, "kitchen" isn't an adjective, so that seems evidence against. Equinox ◑ 00:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Would you say that in the sentence
 * The serving staff at this restaurant are very good.
 * that serving is a noun? If so, would the word reclining in reclining chair also be a noun? I can see a case to be made that it is, and I would at least say that it makes more sense than calling it a verb, but I also think it eliminates a distinction in usage that we should be able to see clearly. — Soap — 13:24, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Words that are principally nouns (including proper nouns) and gerunds (verb forms) can be used attributively. Having an adjective PoS definitions in addition to those for the noun or verb just complicates our entries and gives is the need to keep all the "adjective" definitions coordinated with the noun and gerund definitions. Also, we would need to attest each adjective definition.
 * To avoid all of this we follow CGEL (2005) in applying some tests to determine whether a given word behaves sufficiently like an adjective. The tests are gradability/comparability, predicate use, distinct semantics, and modifiability by adverbial too or adverbial very. We only require evidence that a word passes one of these tests. (I don't know whether we have explicitly addressed whether three quotes each attesting to a different test are sufficient.) DCDuring (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * An example of a participle that is an adjective is - it can be used comparatively (e.g. "more abiding"). Theknightwho (talk) 14:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that abiding also has a meaning that abide does not have, at least not in current English. DCDuring (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Isn't that necessary for it to be comparable, though? Theknightwho (talk) 23:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Does your reply mean that you think serving is a noun in the use example above? You never actually said yes. Without an answer I dont really know what to say. Thanks, — Soap — 14:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It looks like an -ing-form, aka 'present participle'/gerund. DCDuring (talk) 14:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * : you're overlooking the distinction between participles and gerunds. Gerunds are different from participles, but they're still not adjectives. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you believe that all of the so-called noncomparable adjectives ending in -ing are gerunds, or just some? I would find it hard to accept reclining in the phrase reclining chair is a gerund, just as I dont believe its a verb. The most obvious part of speech in that case is an adjective. But nobody has challenged that word yet, so I dont want to set up a straw man. Thanks, — Soap — 14:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Pronunciation is a clue. In "sleeping bag" (a bag for use when sleeping, gerund), there is a gradual descent in pitch across the whole phrase. But "sleeping child" (a child who is performing the verb sleep) the pitch pattern is quite different. Another example: "living room" (one for living in, gerund), the same pitch descent, vs. "living dead", different. For "serving" we might compare "serving maid" (gradual descent; so apparently the gerund, a maid "used" for the action of serving?) with "serving soldier" (one performing service). Equinox ◑ 14:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Authoritative sources say that English present participles behave like verbs and adjectives. Thus, some adjectival behaviors are accounted for as those of the participle. By definition, a participle is a form that shows multiple part of speech behaviors. The part of speech Verb for what is a participle is misleading; it should be Participle. Those who claim knowledge should explain which adjectival behaviors can be accounted for as participial and which not and why. English adjectives shows modification by "more" and "very" to be adjectival-beyond-participial but does not explain why: if participle is an amphibian, it can account for "more" and "very" as well. I would love to see a good external source explaining these things.
 * Authoritative sources further say that some -ing forms are gerunds and that these behave like nouns. Nouns, in their turn, can be used in attributive positions where they show what is arguably an adjectival behavior. Thus, a present participle can behave like an adjective and a gerund can behave like an adjective, none of which necessitates having Adjective section in the entry.
 * By the way, I expanded English adjectives with some examples of "true" adjectival -ing forms. interesting is a case in point: "very interesting"; there are more examples. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Some tests don't serve to distinguish between an adjective and a present participle. I have usually focused on the tests that distinguish a noun from an adjective, as this is the most common kind of case addressed on this page. DCDuring (talk) 15:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but why are people talking as if adjectives must be comparable? There is no  *very reclining chair, but I've yet to see anybody challenge the idea that reclining in this use is an adjective.  Category:English uncomparable adjectives is a thousand miles long and includes many forms ending in -ing. — Soap — 15:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * They don't have to be. Gradability/comparability is not a necessary condition for adjectivity. We treat it as a sufficient condition. DCDuring (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not that they must be comparable, but that participles are not comparable. If we use a word that could be a participle in a comparable way, then that means it's an adjective. English POS are pretty fuzzy, but it's fundamentally useful to separate out the true adjectives because they have these distinctive qualities. As DCDuring says, there are other ways this can happen. Theknightwho (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Adjectives don't have to be comparable. And thus, the tests of adjectivity are terminologically confusing; obviously, non-comparable adjectives such as spinal do not meet them, which is a failure of these so-called tests. These tests are to distinguish adjectival behaviors that can be accounted for by nouns and participles from adjectival behaviors that can't. The whole terminology is confusing. The adjectival behaviors of the participle make it a true incomparable adjective, but that's what it is by definition, that's why it is called "participle", it "participates" on multiple parts of speech. The definition "That swims" adds nothing to "present participle of swim". He who knows the grammar knows that the "present participle" is at the same time an incomparable adjective. In fact, even in "she is swimming", "swimming" is arguably an adjective, and the phrase is equivalent to "she is in the state of swimming". But someone has decided that once the form becomes gradable, it becomes something more than a participle, but they did not explain why and did not trace it to a source. So the confusion remains. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Necessity and sufficiency &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:54, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Explains nothing. Why is modification by "more" not participial given participle acts as adjective? Or put differently, why is the participle endowed with incomparable adjective capabilities but not with comparable/gradable adjective capabilities? --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you please stop spamming this same point over and over? Before commenting this, you had already made three comments of approximately 200 words each (2 in this thread and one in ) that say practically the same thing: that you don't understand why gradability is used to distinguish participles from true adjectives. We get it. You do not have to say everything that comes into your head every time you think it. It just crowds out everyone else. Theknightwho (talk) 02:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To restate my position more concisely:
 * In the expression serving staff, serving is not a verb because it describes the noun staff categorically. Waiters employed in a restaurant do not cease to be serving staff when they take their lunch breaks.
 * Likewise, serving is not a noun (or an appositional use of a gerund of a noun), again because it describes what the staff do, not an activity they are merely associated with. A serving tray is a good example of appositional use of a gerund because the tray is not itself an agent that serves dishes; it is used by other people to serve dishes.
 * Therefore serving in this phrase cannot be either a verb or a noun, and the most obvious way to categorize it is to call it an adjective ... which I suspect is where most casual users browsing Wiktionary will be looking for it. — Soap — 12:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Semantic reasoning is a poor tool for determining in which grammatical word class a given group of usages of a term falls in.
 * Most present participles (verbs) seem to be used both in a sense parallel to serving staff ("staff that is serving at the moment") and serving staff ("staff that typically engages in serving"). I see no essential distinction between that case and the case of serving tray ("a tray (eg, normally merely decorative, too delicate for use) that is being used for serving at the moment) and serving tray ("tray typically used for serving"). DCDuring (talk) 14:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I might be done talking here then. I dont know why people seem to come up with ever more tortuous reasons to categorize these words as every possible part of speech except the most obvious one. I've explained up above why inanimate objects like serving tray are not the same as human agents; repeating my argument at this point just makes it look like I'm unsure of myself.  I leave it up for the community to decide. Best regards, — Soap — 14:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Soap Think about it like this: every situation where you can use a participle, you can also just use a noun ("the kitchen bin" or "the office canteen") - those attributive nouns also lack the qualities that we've been talking about. The difference with participles is that they derive from verbs, but if you categorised them as adjectives, you'd have to do the same for attributive nouns. You can also use "-ing" words as ordinary nouns, too: "walking is good for your health". However, we call them gerunds instead, because they're very specific (i.e. always uncountable, and referring to the activity collectively). Parts of speech often blend into each other like this, but the solution is to look at it systematically and to categorise correctly based on that approach, rather than just shoving all "-ing" words into multiple POS. Theknightwho (talk) 14:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In light of that, it occurs to me that the present participle is essentially just an attributive use of the gerund, actually. Theknightwho (talk) 14:32, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

RFV Failed Ioaxxere (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

RFD discussion: January 2022–April 2023

 * See Talk:falling.