Three participles appearing in the same form.

[JJM Ballantyne]

KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid.

Responding "iconoclastically," I always consider the "past participle" as a modifier,* pure and simple.

* "Modifier" is the grab-bag term I use for adjectives, adverbs, determiners and whatever.

[Casiopea]

Greeting, JJM.

"Modifier" is a great term , but I'm not sure it works for compound verb forms.

At any rate, M56 asked:

Originally Posted by M56

Does anyone disagree with this [statement]?

It is well known that English has three kinds of participle which appear in the same form.

In my opinion, and working from examples similar to M56's 2. and 3., "stolen" does in fact seem to "appear in the same [compound verb] form", but appearances can be deceptive: 2. and 3. are structurally different.

Verbal compound
2. are stolen (BE + -en; Passive)
EX: These burgers are stolen frequently.

Nominal compound
3. are stolen (LV + -en; Copular)
EX: These burgers are stolen.

What are your thoughts?

[MrPedantic]

It seems we also have to distinguish between the (indefinite) past participles of transitive and intransitive verbs:

1. Loved, eaten, broken – passive voice.
2. Faded, fallen, returned – active voice.

Using the term "perfect participle" might be awkward; what would we then use for:

3. Having eaten (active), having been eaten (passive).

MrP

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by MrPedantic

It seems we also have to distinguish between the (indefinite) past participles of transitive and intransitive verbs:

1. Loved, eaten, broken – passive voice.
2. Faded, fallen, returned – active voice.

. . . one's a participle, the other a verb? (I missed your point. Sorry. ) Semantics saves the day, no?

EX: MrP is loved (by all). verbal
EX: My heart is broken (*by all). nominal
EX: The cake is half eaten (*by all). nominal

This I can agree with:

Originally Posted by MrP

Using the term "perfect participle" might be awkward; what would we then use for:

3. Having eaten (active), having been eaten (passive).

Where did M56's three "terms" come from? They're not well-known to me.

[Roro]

Hello MrPedantic, I guess you are arguing against M56, but just a word!

I personally don't see if there's any problem with Casiopea's statement above; it's pure and simple, IMHO.

Note, there are only "two" kinds of participles in English: present -ing and past -ed/-en.

The terms 'present' and 'past' are quite misnomers, though!

[MrPedantic]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

. . . one's a participle, the other a verb?...

Sorry, I must have been inadvertently ambiguous. I meant "we also have to distinguish between the past participles of transitive verbs and intransitive verbs".

The participles of transitive verbs are passive; the participles of intransitive verbs are active.

MrP

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Roro

. . . but just a word!

Good morning, Roro. The way I see it - and I've yet to wipe the sleep from my eyes, so I could be half asleep, here - the issue at hand is M56's terms, "perfect participle", and so on.

We, that's you, me, MrP, and M56, all agree, the terms are problematic. Thing is, though, where did those terms come from and why are we even debating them? It's a vacuous topic -as per usual with M56. But - so as not to throw the baby out with the bathwater - there is, I believe, something woven within M56's statement (See post #1) that is worth saving and discussing. MrP captures it here:

Originally Posted by MrP

It seems we also have to distinguish between the (indefinite) past participles of transitive and intransitive verbs:

1. Loved, eaten, broken – passive voice.
2. Faded, fallen, returned – active voice.

[MrPedantic]

Originally Posted by Roro

Hello MrPedantic, I guess you are arguing against M56..

Hello, Roro! :)

I never argue after midnight...I just thought I'd throw my 2p-worth in, to make sure I was still awake...

See you,
MrP

[Casiopea]

Thanks. It's morning here, so I'm somewhat viewing life from an ambiguous stance.

Originally Posted by MrPedantic

The participles of transitive verbs are passive; the participles of intransitive verbs are active.

OK. Say, for example . . .

[Roro]

Hello, sorry to butt in again!
Yes, many languages have such a distinction, morphologically. I'm not sure if it's applicable to English.
What a surprise! I've just checked another window and noticed that we all are online now. Wow. How nice...

Originally Posted by MrP

I never argue after midnight...

:) Sleep tight...