[Grammar] eye - eyed

Status
Not open for further replies.

MrRubik

Member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
English
Home Country
England
Current Location
England
Why does eye become eyed in 'the blue-eyed boy'? Also, 'the three-legged dog', are there any rules to creating these forms?
 

BobK

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Location
Spencers Wood, near Reading, UK
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
I don't know of a rule, and I've never felt the need to look for one. If someone has something, you use the participle.

He has blue eyes -> he is blue-eyed
She has brown eyes -> she is brown-eyed
The pig has a pot-belly -> it is a pot-bellied pig
The stool has three legs -> it is a three-legged stool
He has short hair -> he is short-haired
The man is wearing a blue suit - the blue-suited man ...[this is always attributive - it'd be most strange to say 'The man is blue-suited']

Some languages handle attributes differently, but I think the English usage is quite consistent (in this case, that is;-))

b
 

TheParser

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Why does eye become eyed in 'the blue-eyed boy'? Also, 'the three-legged dog', are there any rules to creating these forms?


NOT A TEACHER


(1) I have not found a "rule," but I have found a little information.

(2) You can change some nouns to an adjective by adding the letters -ed

at the end:

The city has a wall. It is a walled city.(A special ending such as -ed,

-ing, etc., is called a SUFFIX.)

(3) You can do this to some noun phrases, too:

Tom has blue eyes. Therefore, he is a blue-eyed man.

(4) As you have already guessed, when -ed is used this way

with a noun or noun phrase, -ed = "having."

***

This information comes from A Comprehensive Grammar of the English

Language, by Professor Randolph Quirk et. al. It is not recommended

for beginning learners.

If you google "English suffixes," you will probably find more information

about the suffix -ed.
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I believe the logic behind it is this: in English you can verb nouns (which I've just done with the noun "verb"). So, a missing mental link between "blue eyes" and "blue-eyed" would be a verb "to blue-eye" which would mean "to give blue eyes to" ("blue-eyed" would be a regular past participle then).

It would be great to learn the history of the construction.
 

BobK

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Location
Spencers Wood, near Reading, UK
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
I believe the logic behind it is this: in English you can verb nouns (which I've just done with the noun "verb"). So, a missing mental link between "blue eyes" and "blue-eyed" would be a verb "to blue-eye" which would mean "to give blue eyes to" ("blue-eyed" would be a regular past participle then).

It would be great to learn the history of the construction.

;-) I think that's a very good (and likely) explanation. (But I agree that it would be good to know for sure...).

b
 

MrRubik

Member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
English
Home Country
England
Current Location
England
Thanks for the information and thoughts on this. I know how verbs can be changed into adjectives by using them in past participle form, e.g. the drunken man but in reference to birdeen's call I don't agree. With TheParser's example, wall to walled, it works but a verb from the noun eye doesn't make sense to me. The key aspect for me in most of the examples is that they are all compound adjectives, an adjective-noun form then being used as an adjective itself for another noun. They do look like verbs in there construction though, even the way the noun changes from a stand-alone noun to a noun being used in a compound adjective is very verb-like, consider, belly to bellied in 'pot-bellied pig', with the verbs, bully to bullied, hurry to hurried. I don't know how to explain the gemination of the g in 'three legs' to 'three-legged' from a verb point of view though, unless the s indicating plurality is altered into another g or if it is required for fluency because of the sounds involved. I don't know! Are there any verb forms that do this consonant gemination from present to past form?
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Eye can be a verb- he eyed them up. And the same is true for most of the examples- belly can be a verb, though I have only seen it in dictionaries.

Also, as we have the concept of using the present and past participles as adjectives, I don't see that we need for every adjective that looks like a past participle to come from a genuine verb.

With leg/legged/leggings, doubling the final letter is common- put/putting, bin/binned- it doesn't indicate plurality. One syllable verbs ending with a single consonant preceded by a single vowel double the consonant in the -ing & -ed forms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top