Note: I sat on this question for quite some time, but after wracking my brain on it for quite a while, I finally caved and decided to ask it as a question.
When I say “dining room,” most people, I presume, would probably say the word “dining” is a gerund-participial verb (or more traditionally, I would personally say (just the way I look at things) that it’s a “gerund” acting as a modifier of the noun (table for dining, not a table that IS dining ~ present participle ~).
Regardless, how can “dining” be distinguished with 100% certainty as a “verb”, rather than “a deverbal noun/attributive noun”,
as in: couldn’t someone see “a dining room” as “a room for habitual dining,” just as much as “a room for habitually dining?” If someone interpreted “dining” in their minds like the former instance, wouldn’t that make “dining” noun-preferred over verbal?
A Sidenote: I still feel like a verbal interpretation is preferable; however, I just don’t understand the tests of concretely establishing why the former interpretation (verb) COULD be interpreted over the latter (noun) interpretation, or vice versa.
Other examples, for instance, where I’m unsure as to whether the -ing word is a gerund-participle verb or simply a noun include:
Marketing personnel (As in, personnel for the marketing of various products (noun) or personnel for marketing products (gerund)).
Writing table (a table for occasional (or frequent) writing (noun) or a table for writing (things) (gerund).
Or others, such as:
Reading assignment
Opening quotations
Accounting costs
Gaming computer
Advertising expenditures
Dating app
Drinking water
Climbing wall
Swimming pool
Walking stick (Etc)
I could go on forever.
Do I just pick one interpretation and stick with it?
Also, it’s not that I NEED to know whether it’s one or the other. If there is simply no way to tell, then I’m fine with someone saying that it’s ambiguous, but if that’s the case, is there a “preferred” choice in these cases, or no?