Are the definitions:

  1. a word that serves as the predicate of a sentence
  2. a content word that denotes an action or a state

two distinct senses of this word, or two different definitions of the same thing? The latter, I suspect, in which case they ought to be merged. Note however that some of the translations refer to sense 2. — Paul G 16:06, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

From RFVEdit

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.


Needs proper citations. --Connel MacKenzie 22:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Note: This rfv applies to verb as a verb. DAVilla 16:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I have provided one more quotation. I do not know if the disputed sense meets CFI or not. — Beobach972 04:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added five -- not sure how good some of them are, but there should be enough evidence among them to verify. Cynewulf 16:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
RFVpassed. — Beobach972 04:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Auxiliaries in EnglishEdit

The definition right now is "(grammar) A word that indicates an action, event, or state.". This says nothing for auxiliary verbs like "could". I want to add something for this to the definition but I don't want to make it too complicated. Can anyone think of a wording? Rkaup (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't. See auxiliary verb JamesjiaoTC 20:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Verb as verbEdit

Was the use of "verb" as a verb meaning "to use as a verb" coined by Watterson in Calvin & Hobbes, or just popularized there? Can we note that in the etymology or notes section? --Jtle515 (talk) 02:53, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Return to "verb" page.