He has a short fuse

[vaunne]

Have you heard an expression, "He has a short fuse"

[albertino]

Have you heard an expression, "He has a short fuse"

(Not a teacher)
Hi, there. Yes, I have.
It means one is bad-tempered, easily irritated.

[pinkmast3ritza]

(Not a teacher)
Hi, there. Yes, I have.
It means one is bad-tempered, easily irritated.

Hi. I read your post and i can't figure out something. So..he has a short fuse= easily irritated. If you say about a person that is easily irritated does not that mean that the person is in that specific moment "easily irritated"? I mean i see irritated more like an adjective rather than an adverb..I would probably say.. easily irritating person?:D, which I believe it is not correct because you would have use it..Can I ask why it is not correct with the ing? Or if it is correct, also why?:) Can you please answer my question if you can make head and tails out of my post? If you can also proofread it..it would be great. Many many thx!

[BobK]

Hi. I read your post and i can't figure out something. So..he has a short fuse= easily irritated. Nope. 'he has a short fuse= HE IS easily irritated....

If you use an "=" sign, both sides of the equation must be syntactically equivalent. Please.

And excuse me - I have a short fuse.

b

[pinkmast3ritza]

If you use an "=" sign, both sides of the equation must be syntactically equivalent. Please.

And excuse me - I have a short fuse.

b

Well excuse me..in my languange you can skip some of the pronouns..anyway I do not intend to irritate you:)..Still, you didn't answer to my question..why it's "easily irritatING" incorrect? Maybe it is just a dumb question for you:)..Actually in romanian sounds quiet strange that's why i'm keep bugging you with this one:)..the adverb it is very different from the adjective, though both of them can acompany a verb but adverb suggest something that could happen [in this case the person could become irritated] while the adjective states that the person it is irritated at that moment. Please tell me : english grammar considers "IRRITATED" in this exemple an adverb or an adjective. Bunch of thanks!

[BobK]

'Irritated' is an adjective, specifically a past participle (formed from a verb, indicating that something has happened). 'Irritating' is also an adjective, specifically a present participle (formed from a verb, indicating that someone or something is doing something). The irritant is irritating; the sufferer of the irritation is irritated. For example, a fly might be irritating - its buzzing may irritate (active) someone. The person is irritated (passive) by the fly. If you exchange 'irritated' for 'irritating', you change the meaning:
A is irritating B => B is being irritated by A.

b

[pinkmast3ritza]

'Irritated' is an adjective, specifically a past participle (formed from a verb, indicating that something has happened). 'Irritating' is also an adjective, specifically a present participle (formed from a verb, indicating that someone or something is doing something). The irritant is irritating; the sufferer of the irritation is irritated. For example, a fly might be irritating - its buzzing may irritate (active) someone. The person is irritated (passive) by the fly. If you exchange 'irritated' for 'irritating', you change the meaning:
A is irritating B => B is being irritated by A.

b

I guess you don't have ADVERB in english?:-":D Anyway THANK YOU very much! this was really very helpful.Regards

[Chicchick]

I always thought it was to do with bombs (or piles of gunpowder) going off quickly after lighting a short fuse that didn't take long to burn through.

This would relate to someone flaring up in a temper very easily.

Or be quick to 'blow up into a rage'.

I hope that helps.