syntax - "What I'm doing is watching TV." — Why does it have to be the gerund-participle ('watching')?




  1. What I do is watch TV.

  2. What I did was watch TV.

  3. What I had done was watch TV.
    ...



But,




  1. What I am doing is watching TV.



The only possible form of watch in the last sentence is the gerund-participle, which cannot occur in the previous ones:



*What I am doing is watch TV.
*What I did was watching TV.
?What I have done is watching TV.



Do you agree? Why does sentence #4 refuse the general pattern?


(There might or might not be other ways to rephrase these sentences (e.g. to watch in 1, is I'm watching in 4, etc), which I'm not concerned about right now.)




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

verbs - "Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

time - English notation for hour, minutes and seconds

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

etymology - Origin of "s--t eating grin"

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

word choice - Which is the correct spelling: “fairy” or “faerie”?