syntactic analysis - What part of speech is ‘mountains’ in the sentence “I like climbing mountains”?


I'm trying to understand the grammar of this sentence:



I like climbing mountains.



Here's what I've got so far:



  • "I" is the subject

  • "like" is the verb

  • I believe "climbing" is a participle

  • Maybe "mountains" is the direct object?


Is that right? And are "climbing" and "mountains" both acting as nouns? Or is the noun "climbing mountains" and "climbing" is an adjective? I'm getting lost. Can anyone clarify this for me?



Answer



tl;dr: The part of speech of mountains is here a noun. It’s the direct object of the verb climbing.



How we know that climbing is a verb, though, is more work. That’s because it might instead be a noun or an adjective. It’s a verb as just mentioned, but let’s look at all three cases just to make sure.


We’ll assume that for parts of speech, your possible choices are one of noun, verb, adjective, or adverb. Parts of speech like conjunction, preposition, determiner, interjection, and such aren’t really relevant here.


Note that parts of speech can only be single words. Things like subject, predicate, and direct object are not parts of speech. They are syntactic constituents, which can be more than one word.



In




  1. I like climbing roses.



The word roses is the direct object, and it is here being modified by the adjective climbing. You can tell it’s an adjective not a noun adjunct because it passes the predicate test:



  • The roses are climbing (ones). [TRUE]


You know it isn't a verb here because you can't flip to the infinitive without a change in meaning:



  • I like to climb roses. [FALSE]


You can also tell it’s not a verb because adding an adverb of manner to one side means something totally different from what you get adding it to the other side:



  • I like quickly climbing roses. [adjective meaning]

  • I like climbing roses quickly. [verb meaning]


If climbing had been a verb, you would have been able to move quickly without changing the meaning. But you can’t.



In




  1. I like climbing gyms.



Here now gyms is the direct object of like, but climbing has now become a noun modifying gyms, not an adjective modifying gyms. You can tell this because it fails the predicate test:



  • The gyms are climbing. [FALSE]


Therefore these are gyms that are for climbing, and so climbing is here a noun. You can think of climbing-gyms as a compound noun.


The stress has also shifted.


You know it's a noun because you can add other customary components of a noun phrase like quantifiers and adjectives:



  • I like some easy climbing gyms.


Because you can do that, you know it’s not a verb there.



In




  1. I like climbing mountains.



The direct object of the verb like is the entire non-finite verb phrase “climbing mountains”, where mountains is in turn the direct object of the non-finite verb climbing. Since only verbs can have direct objects and mountains is the direct object of climbing, that means that climbing must be being used as a verb here.


Verbs not only take objects, they can also take adverbs of manner. So for example:



  • I like quickly climbing mountains.

  • I like climbing mountains quickly.


Because you can freely move quickly and the two sentences above still mean the same thing, you know that quickly is modifying climbing as a verb. If it were doing so as an adjective, you would not be able to move quickly around like that without shifting the meaning.


In other words, if they had meant different things after adverbial movement, then these would just be mountains that happened to be quickly climbing ones, like quickly climbing roses. But since that’s not what this means, it’s a verb.


Again, the entire verb phrase, not any single word, is the direct object of like, but climbing is clearly a verb because only verbs take direct objects and relocatable adverbs of manner in this fashion.


In this instance, you can be sure it's a verb because you can flip it from the one sort of non-finite verb phrase to the other kind without any change in meaning:



  • I like to climb mountains.

  • I like to quickly climb mountains.

  • I like to climb mountains quickly.


Since that means the same thing, both climbing and to climb are verbs here.



Some posters have suggested that this instance of climbing is a noun. It can’t be, as I’ve just demonstrated that it has a direct object, which only a verb can have.


But if you still aren’t convinced, let’s try to do noun-things to this would-be noun. If it were actually a noun, you would be able to modify it with an adjective like dangerous.



  • I like ✻dangerous climbing mountains. [UNGRAMMATICAL]


That shows that climbing is not a noun here, since the result is ungrammatical when you try to add an adjective to it.


It’s a verb. Just a verb: not a noun, not an adjective.



postscript


I’m just glad you didn’t ask what climbing was in




  1. I like climbing climbing mountain roses climbing mountain climbing gyms.



For up that wall climb climbing buffalo climbing. :)


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

Years and years ago, I remember reading in a book on AmE usage that the phrasal turn a baby creeps before it walks was to some extent more common to AmE than to BrE, which preferred exclusively the "crawl" version. And so, I just recently checked on the accuracy of that information on NGram Viewer , and it actually was fact... more than a century ago! What I would like you to tell is if it would sound sort of weird to hear someone say today in the US that a child "creeps" before walking and running (see Synonyms ) rather than it crawls. Also, what's the story to those terms? How did "to crawl" come to prevail and supersede "to creep" to describe the way a baby moves around? As with a plant, so with a child. His mind grows by natural stages. A child creeps before he walks , sits before he stands, cries before he laughs, babbles before he talks, draws a circle before he draws a square, lies before he tells the truth, and is selfish before he
Read more

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

Does this sentence have too many subjunctives? If it please the king, let it be decreed that they be destroyed, and I will pay 10,000 talents of silver into the hands of those who have charge of the king's business, that they may put it into the king's treasuries. I am stumped by this sentence construction. First, there is "Let it be," which is a common English idiomatic phrase, but then it follows another subjunctive. Is that to say you can actually have a subjunctive followed by another subjunctive? Also, why does the sentence use "please"? If that's the subjunctive tense there, then why is it followed by another subjunctive instead of a conditional, or maybe "Let it be" is the conditional? Lastly, I wish to know how the that is used in the sentence. Perhaps, the simplified sentence can be restated like so: Let it be decreed that they be destroyed and that they may put it into the king's treasuries. If not, maybe the simplified sent
Read more

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

I've been reading William Manchester's book "American Caesar", which is about Douglas MacArthur, and I found that he uses a strange convention for pluralizing the family name. When talking about the MacArthurs as a whole, he writes MacArthur' with an apostrophe, as in "After the war, the MacArthur' lived in Tokyo while the general was proconsul" (yes, he uses that term to describe him). I have never seen or heard of a rule that would prescribe this. Manchester is a bit old-timey in his style: for example, he also writes "in behalf of" instead of "on behalf of", which is the only one I have ever seen. So perhaps this is similar. Where does he get this apostrophe from? Edit: There seems to be some difficulty finding examples, which is odd. Here is a direct link to a page from Google Books that shows the apostrophe.
Read more

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

This is a phrase I’m particularly confused about, because it’s used often when something is manipulated or changed. For example, sometimes images surface online that are clearly Photoshopped, but people refer to them as “doctored” images. Why use the word “doctored” here? Answer The earliest Google Books match for an instance of doctored in a transitional (or perhaps post-transitional) sense between "amended" and "adulterated" appears in William Marshall, The Rural Economy of Glocestershire; Including Its Dairy: Together with the Dairy Management of North Wiltshire, and the Management of Orchards and Fruit Liquor, in Herefordshire , volume 2 (1789): Men in general, however, whose palates are set to rough cider, consider the common sweet sort as an effeminate beverage; and rough cider, properly manufactured, is probably the most generous liquor; being deemed more wholesome, to habits in general, than sweet cider:—even when genuine. That which is drank, in the kingd
Read more

phrases - Somebody is gonna kiss the donkey

I heard this phrase when I was watching Battleship. An old man said, "Somebody is gonna kiss the donkey." I do not know what it means, I only heard it in a movie. What is this phrase mean? In Addition: I think it was Rihanna who said "Saddle Ridge will be in weapons range in five minutes," then the old man stated the phrase. Answer It is a confused attempt at a play on (for example) "kiss my ass," or, some similar phrase. It is quite common in English today that idioms get mangled.
Read more

typography - When a dagger is used to indicate a note, must it come after an asterisk?

The typographical symbol dagger (†) has several meanings. Possibly its most common use is as a footnote marker. According to You Have a Point There: A Guide to Punctuation and Its Allies ( Partridge , 1953), when it is used for this purpose, it must be used for second footnotes only; the first footnote should be indicated by an asterisk (*), the third a double dagger (‡) and further footnotes other symbols or numbers. Where does Patridge's rule fall on a scale of one to ten, where one is "this is just one guy's random opinion" and ten is "this is a widely accepted rule of English and any deviation from it is unarguably incorrect"? This question was inspired by this Meta Stack Overflow question about the use of daggers on Stack Exchange site FAQ pages . Answer The dagger (also known as an obelisk ) is properly used for the second footnote. The asterisk is for the first, and the double dagger is for the third. This is supported by several websites: And so
Read more

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

What is the origin of the phrase shit eating grin ? How did it come to mean showing smugness or self-satisfaction of an individual's actions? Answer From the Urban Dictionary: ...these uses are documented in the Oxford English Dictionary no earlier than 1957 There have been similar expressions used quite far back: In Book XXI of his History of Rome, Livy describes a Carthaginian sect of coprophages, the risus faecivorus, or shit-eating grin, being commonly displayed by its adherents. Although, its origin is undetermined, they may have been incidents which caused the invention of this phrase. Below is an excerpt: "1944 Jrnl. Nerv. & Mental Dis. XCIX. 959 Among demented patients in advanced stages of their illness,..it is not rare to see some of them grasp their own feces, chew them and eat them often with great pleasure and satisfaction (coprophagia).
Read more