The Verb "To Be"

[markgm]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: markgm
This is too funny! A teacher friend of mine rides me that I sometimes omit 'to be.' "This wall needs painted." I grew up in Western PA! Right or wrong, here is how I learned it:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Painted.

So the wall therefore needs painted.

no, after the application of paint, the state of the wall will BE painted. Therefore, the wall needs to BE painted.

That fails the logic test of how I was taught:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Be painted.

So the wall therefore needs be painted.

Ma, come out 'ere wit dem paint brushes, them walls need be painted.

 

[leftyman]

To be or not to be?

 

[cKGunslinger]

So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Safeway

Originally posted by: purbeast0
I have lived in MD all my life and I have no clue wtf you are talking about.

"This floor needs mopped" just is wrong, and I would say (as well as anyone I know) would say "This floor needs to be mopped".

You are correct.

"This floor needs mopping."
"This floor needs to be mopped."
"Someone needs to mop the floor."

"I look at the floor and I see it needs sweeping"

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Ned Flanders
It doesn't make sense with out the 'to be' - People who omit that are idiots.

Exactly. I don't care if it's a "regional" thing. If that's the case then everyone in that region is a moron.

Here's another one. When we first moved to North Dakota we would hear people say things like "Oh, for cute" or "Oh, for funny". My first reaction was "WTF?" with this face -->

Got used to it eventually, but it never made sense to me (and I definitely never said it).

 

[JujuFish]

People omit words all the time. How is this any different?

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: dullard
I don't know the exact grammar rules, but I perfer it with the "to be".

For a good example, click on P&N. Look at the current top link. Its title is "Tax system definitely needs reformed". I would rather see "needs to be reformed" or use "needs reform".

news systems always omitted those pesky small verbs in lieu of print space.

 

[glen]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

The verb to be uses the form were in an unreal condition.
If he were dead, he'd be spinning.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Ned Flanders
It doesn't make sense with out the 'to be' - People who omit that are idiots.

Exactly. I don't care if it's a "regional" thing. If that's the case then everyone in that region is a moron.

I wouldn't call them a moron unless they don't realize it's informal and not appropriate for formal writing. I don't think there is anything wrong with regional variations in the English language. Regional phrases and accents distinguish us in a world that is more connected and "smaller" than ever before.

Around here we go "down the shore" instead of to the beach, and we stand "on line" instead of "in line."

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: glen

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

The verb to be uses the form were in an unreal condition.
If he were dead, he'd be spinning.

One of the only instances of the subjunctive mood in the English language.

 

[Safeway]

Originally posted by: leftyman
To be or not to be?

That's what I thought when I first saw the thread, too.

 

[sao123]

all forms of 'be' in english
is
are
was
were
has
have
had
be
been
do
done
did

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: sao123
all forms of 'be' in english
is
are
was
were
has
have
had
be
been
do
done
did

am

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: sao123
all forms of 'be' in english
is
are
was
were
has
have
had
be
been
do
done
did

am

ooo thank you... forgot one.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: glen

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

The verb to be uses the form were in an unreal condition.
If he were dead, he'd be spinning.

Your arse needs kicked

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

Shakespeare isn't dead?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

Shakespeare isn't dead?

Of course not.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

Shakespeare isn't dead?

Of course not.

he's one old mofo then. does he look like keith richards or worse?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So the question is "to be" or not "to be?"

If Shakespeare was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave.

Shakespeare isn't dead?

Shhh.. naked has already said too much, forsooth.

 

[FeuerFrei]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: sao123
all forms of 'be' in english
is
are
was
were
has
have
had
be
been
do
done
did

am

Actually:

am
is
are
was
were
be
being
been
You must be thinking of the helping verb list which also includes:

have
has
had
do
does
did
shall
will
should
would
may
might
must
can
could

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: FeuerFrei

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: sao123
all forms of 'be' in english
is
are
was
were
has
have
had
be
been
do
done
did

am

Actually:

am
is
are
was
were
be
being
been
You must be thinking of the helping verb list which also includes:

have
has
had
do
does
did
shall
will
should
would
may
might
must
can
could

Yeah I thought so, but I didn't feel like looking it up so I didn't correct him on that.

 

[ebaycj]

I prefer "Not To Be."

 

[ghostman]

Originally posted by: markgm

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: markgm
This is too funny! A teacher friend of mine rides me that I sometimes omit 'to be.' "This wall needs painted." I grew up in Western PA! Right or wrong, here is how I learned it:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Painted.

So the wall therefore needs painted.

no, after the application of paint, the state of the wall will BE painted. Therefore, the wall needs to BE painted.

That fails the logic test of how I was taught:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Be painted.

So the wall therefore needs be painted.

Ma, come out 'ere wit dem paint brushes, them walls need be painted.

Wow. You totally confused that post. The problem is that your last line ("Painted." or "Be painted.") is not a complete sentence, whereas all the other 3 lines are complete sentences.

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
It will be painted.

Besides, there is no reason to respond to question 1 by combining responses 2 and 4 to form "The wall needs painted." Question 1 was already answered by response 1.

I live in NYC and have never heard anyone drop "to be" like this. There is, unfortunately, an overuse of the non-conjugated "to be" in NYC in the form of ebonics: "When he be comin' over?" "He be dare tonight."

 

[markgm]

Originally posted by: ghostman

Originally posted by: markgm

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: markgm
This is too funny! A teacher friend of mine rides me that I sometimes omit 'to be.' "This wall needs painted." I grew up in Western PA! Right or wrong, here is how I learned it:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Painted.

So the wall therefore needs painted.

no, after the application of paint, the state of the wall will BE painted. Therefore, the wall needs to BE painted.

That fails the logic test of how I was taught:

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
Be painted.

So the wall therefore needs be painted.

Ma, come out 'ere wit dem paint brushes, them walls need be painted.

Wow. You totally confused that post. The problem is that your last line ("Painted." or "Be painted.") is not a complete sentence, whereas all the other 3 lines are complete sentences.

What does the wall need?
It needs paint on it.
What will the condition of the wall be after you apply paint?
It will be painted.

Besides, there is no reason to respond to question 1 by combining responses 2 and 4 to form "The wall needs painted." Question 1 was already answered by response 1.

I live in NYC and have never heard anyone drop "to be" like this. There is, unfortunately, an overuse of the non-conjugated "to be" in NYC in the form of ebonics: "When he be comin' over?" "He be dare tonight."

I didn't confuse the post, you just forgot the first part about talking about this to a teacher friend of mine. I know all of the arguments against it, and I know the proper way to use the verb. This isn't what the OP asked. No one is asking if it's correct, they're asking why it's done. You can change my little structure all you want to have it make sense, but you're not answering the OPs question then. The reason people in this area drop the verb 'to be' is because that is what they were taught. I am providing the reasoning for why it is dropped and how we were taught.

If I follow your group through, the final sentence will be: The wall needs it will be painted.

Basically what we were taught in that region was this:
What does the X need?
You want to Y the X.
What will the condition of X be after you Y it?
Y'ed.

Therefore, the X needs Y'ed.