From the Free dictionary:
Being or seeming to be without an end; endless. ...
Tiresomely long; tedious.
We've been driving for hours! Every time we round a bend or top a hill, the road just keeps going. It's interminable! It goes on forever!
Edit after the question was revised:
It was a long road, stretching interminably as it went, ...
Actually, venomed exists and you can find it here. In literature I have seen the expression venomed arrows, meaning covered with venom, but according to this source it also means poisoned as the past participle of the verb venom.
It's a quote. One of the very first anthems of the women's movement was Helen Reddy's 1970s hit "I Am Woman" (see Wikipedia for the song's history). Its opening lines are
I am woman, hear me roar
In numbers too big to ignore
The line "I am woman, hear me roar" has since become something of a catchphrase (Wikipedia). Katy Perry's song of empowerment ...
In biology, the term envenomated (past participle of envenomate) is used for this; Google Books turns up uses like:
Distribution of Venoms in Envenomated Animals
Called strike-induced chemosensory searching (SICS), this phenomenon facilitates location of an envenomated rodent which might wander several meters from the snake after the strike.
The first ...
Both are grammatical. The first uses the past tense (‘was lost’), which indicates that the connection was lost at a specific time in the past. The second uses the present perfect construction (‘has been lost’), which indicates that the loss of the connection has present relevance. So, if the loss of connection occurred, let us say, last week, but it’s now ...
I think this is an example of "recency illusion," which you described very well as the situation where "increasing observation" is caused by "increasing awareness."
From one point of view, the past participle could be said to be disappearing. But there are a lot of caveats, and the process has been going on for much longer than any single person's lifetime.
To envenom someone or something is to make it poisonous or to add poison to it. So, if using poison in the figurative sense of fouling, embittering, spoiling, etc. it would be acceptable, as in envenoming a relationship. It would not be suitable when using poison in the sense of murdering someone by poison, or adulterating something lethally.
McCawley doesn't say much about it, as far as I can see, but it appears to be a variety of the complex of serial verb constructions around motion verbs and their inchoatives and causatives, like the various serial verb constructions mentioned in this freshman grammar exam question (#4, restricted to come and go):
Bill went and dug some clams. (go and + V)
There are constructions called zeugmas (after Greek ζεῦγμα, 'a yoking') where a word or phrase is intentionally made to apply to two or more others in a sentence despite functioning differently for each. The horde of words in English that can function as various parts of speech mean that zeugmas can be created where a single word simultaneously acts as ...
I would interpret them differently.
"I hate Jill singing those songs" implies that you hate her actions (singing) when she sings those songs.
Whereas "I hate Jill when she is singing those songs" emphasises that you hate her (Jill) when she sings rather than hating her singing.
The past participle of "fly" is "flew." I don't know the song, but Coldplay probably used it either because it rhymed with what they needed to, or to sound "cool."
In baseball, a "fly ball" is a ball that is hit high up into the air. Many people use "flied" to distinguish describing hitting the ball ("he flied out"; meaning someone caught his fly ball) from ...
How about "splashing is forbidden?" Splashing seems to function as either a noun or a verb.
It could be modified by an adverb to fit the verb test:
Loudly splashing is forbidden.
Or it could be modified with an adjective to fit the noun test:
That loud splashing is forbidden.
A psycholinguistic perspective
Ultimately, to address the meat of the ...
Is it ever possible for a sentence to have a word in it
that is simultaneously more than one single part of speech
in that sentence, under the same parse and meaning?
So, if a grammatical English sentence contains a word A, can A be more than one POS?
Parts of speech are grammatical terms and have varying meanings for different grammarians.
Set is indeed a verb, in this case the past participle of the verb to set. Compare it to the following:
Foobar is a novel, written in Python ..
where both set and written are passive constructions that can be expanded to:
Foobar is a novel that is set / written in ..
The comma is unnecessary if the words that follow define foobar, but needed if the words ...
adj. never ending or changing. Continuing or lasting for an indefinitely long time
adv. everlastingly; for all time; "rays...streaming perpetually from the sun"
Endless and Endlessly
having or seeming to have no end or limit and continuing forever without end
It was a an endless road, stretching perpetually ahead of us, as if it ...
Since the same words can be adjectives and adverbs, sentences could be constructed where the word modifies a noun and a verb:
She is and runs fast.
While others cheat, my children are and play fair.
In Yellowstone National Park, bison roam, and truly are, free.
Grammatical terms are not always used consistently in different sources. In general, the term noun modifier is usually a broad term, often encompassing adjectives, nouns used to modify other nouns, verbs used as modifiers (usually past or present participles), and even phrases and clauses that modify a noun.
Adjective: I took the big tire ...
Way too many markers have been deleted from the sentence.
If clarity is the intended goal, some of them, at least, need to be put back. On the other hand, if the intended goal is to match some "correctness" norm, then it doesn't matter whether it's clear.
The issue is taken, which is, as noted, a participial adjective. That identification, however, doesn'...
Bill is absolutely right in saying that there is nothing grammatically wrong with fishing man. It is not likely to be frequently found, but the Corpus of Contemporary American English has this one record from ‘Stern Men’ by Elizabeth Gilbert, published in 2000:
They were famous lobstermen, superior to every fishing man.
My tentative conclusion is that ...
In normal English syntax, single-word modifiers precede the noun they modify, but phrases follow the noun.
So you put the -ing word before the noun it modifies when it is acting as an adjective, not as a non-finite verb. You put the -ing word after the noun when it is part of a verbal phrase with other parts in it; you can’t have a long verbal phrase ...
As other people have written before me, neither example is correct and the most likely change to the sentences you provide is: "I have not been able to make up my mind."
The second sentence is incorrect because of the verb you have chosen (to be able) which cannot be used in the continuous form. However, the expression I am not being is a correct form if ...
Based on our exchange of comments, your third sentence is correct:
The veterinarian was caught off guard when, regaining consciousness,
the cat attacked us.
Since you're trying to say that it is a second attack, I'd add "again":
The veterinarian was caught off guard when, regaining consciousness,
the cat attacked us again.
My guess would be that it is a slight inaccuracy to say that this type of clause reduction can only be done with passives—rather, it can only be done with verbal forms that use be as their auxiliary. Basically the reduction is about removing the subject and verb in a copular clause, leaving the subject complement behind, whether that be a pure adjective or a ...
The main verb is copular was with dummy subject there. It is impossible to cast that into the passive voice. something is the complement which has the participle placed that the CGEL calls a bare passive clause.
The sentence has one independent clause and that one is not passive. However, it does have a second clause (placed on the table) which is.
The verb relate denotes several types of connection between multiple entities:
[WITH OBJECT] 1.0 Make or show a connection between:
the study examines social change within the city and relates it to developments
in the country as a whole
a supercomputer could relate all those factors
1.1 (be related) Be causally connected:
These are verbs heading clauses, which in turn are functioning as the Complements of prepositions. In traditional grammar (where we don't distinguish carefully between what something is and what it is doing), these are called gerunds. This is just because we normally see phrases headed by nouns doing the job of being the Complement of a preposition. So-...