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

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

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

time - English notation for hour, minutes and seconds

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

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

single word requests - What do you call hypothetical inhabitants living on the Moon?