To Mike sensei

[Taka]

OK, so, according to you teachers, the reasons for the confusion are:

#1: Even though "excited" is a past participial adjective, which has a passive feel, many have a problem attaching an emotion as an attribute of "game".

#2: Past participal adjectives have not only a passive feel, but also that of completion. The game is in a process, and therefore it is unusual for you native speakers to use "excited" as an attribute of "game".

Correct?
--------
By the way tdol, is it necessarily true that past participal adjectives have not only a passive feel, but also that of completion at the same time? If so, why? I mean, I thought the "-ed" form of completion and that of the passive was seemingly the same , but essentially different from each other. How does the passive feel, which I think is a basic feel of past partical adjectives, relate to that of completion?

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Taka

..., is it necessarily true that past participal adjectives have not only a passive feel, but also a feel of completion at the same time?

Past participles are considered non-finite verbs (i.e. verbals/unfinished). :D Passive verbs can express a completed act (e.g. was eaten) or an incomplete act (e.g. wasn't eaten yet). Non-finite verbs are unfinished. Adjectives modify nouns (e.g. wooden gate). Past participles express the state or nature of the noun, like this,

He's an excited kind of a guy. (state of the guy)
It's a wooden gate. (nature of the gate)
He's a broken man. (state of the man)

Semantic extension
It's an excited game. (state of the game) correct
It's an excited game. (nature of the game) incorrect or marginal

[Taka]

To me, it seems that your idea:

Originally Posted by Casiopea

Semantic extension
It's an excited game. (state of the game) correct

doesn't really go well with tdol's rule of thumb:

Originally Posted by tdol

Taka, how about trying to apply the finished\unfinshed rule to the adjectives too? Excited = a state, a result, finished. Exciting= a process, unfinished

I mean, I think tdol is saying that "excited"= finished \"exciting" = unfinished, and therefore "As M. Jordan came in, the game became excited" is strange; the game was probably still in progress, not finished. That logic was very easy for me to follow--although I'm still kind of wondering if it is true that past participal adjectives have not only a passive feel, but also that of completion always at the same time. But as I see some sort of discrepancy between tdol's and your theory, now I'm in confusion and not sure which suggestion to follow...

[Francois]

No discrepancy. 'excited' originally means you've been excited (by someone/something), but now the stimulus is over/finished -- but your excitation is still present.
Just my opinion,

FRC

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Francois

No discrepancy. 'excited' originally means you've been excited (by someone/something), but now the stimulus is over/finished -- but your excitation is still present.
Just my opinion,

FRC

Then you cannot apply, as tdol does, the finished\unfinshed rule to the expression like "an excited game" or "the game became excited" to know if it is weird or not. Don't you think so?

[Francois]

Well, in my opinion whether it's finished or not is not the important point in the 'excited game' case. The thing is, can one excite a game in the first place? If you say yes, then an excited game makes sense. If you say 'sounds strange', then so does an excited game.

FRC

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Francois

Well, in my opinion whether it's finished or not is not the important point in the 'excited game' case.

I see. I look for tdol's comments on this one.

Originally Posted by Francois

The thing is, can one excite a game in the first place? If you say yes, then an excited game makes sense. If you say 'sounds strange', then so does an excited game.

Yes, I agree with you. But it looks like things are not as simple as we think.

[Taka]

Wow! You are 4 star member already, Francois.

Amazing...

[Francois]

But it looks like things are not as simple as we think

I for one think it makes sense but it does sound strange, though I'm not qualified to say to what extent. I guess it's all about usage. Some French (colloquial) expression sounded quite odd when they first came out, but sound normal now. Some others have never caught up and just disappeared though.

FRC

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Francois

I for one think it makes sense but it does sound strange, though I'm not qualified to say to what extent.

Same here. It does sound strange to me as well--especially when it is used predicatively. But the reason why I think it's strange is, as I said before, simply because personally I haven't seen "excited" used, predicatively in particular, to explain the state of "a game". No more than "haven't seen", however.

Originally Posted by Francois

I guess it's all about usage.

Yes...that's possible. But I still cannot give up my idea that there should be some grammatical reason(s) for it.

Originally Posted by Francois

Some French (colloquial) expression sounded quite odd when they first came out, but sound normal now. Some others have never caught up and just disappeared though.

Same here in Japan. :)