Children happen to be saying things. What if a kid said,
I’m hating you!

Do you say,
Oh no, you are not hating me. You hate me. To hate is a stative verb; here, you can have a list of stative verbs, you’re going to need it for school, anyway…

I have come across a few languages in my life, and English grammars and grammarians remain the scholarly entities most determinate, in recognizing stative verbs. Whatever order the British Council would enumerate on such special words to memorize, the couple in the picture do not look like rehearsing rote.


It feels quite strange, to be told to parrot words from a list, especially for thought and emotion. It feels a kind of lie, and good liars do not publicize their lying rules.

Let us take the verb to feel; it makes an interesting example. We might say, “I feel fresh”, to speak about our senses. We could say, “I feel love”, to speak about our emotions. Possibly in another context, we also could say, “I feel this is crude”, to say what we think.

It is only in the last sense we would remain — only mostly, still — with the verb to feel in the Simple, for lively talking about a moment in time.

Let us compare American English at work for the verb to love.
This is a dream come true. And I’m loving every minute of it.
(NBC Today Sun)
I’ve been loving it. But I want to keep doing different things.
(People magazine)
Corpus of Contemporary American English, COCA.

Whether the English is American or British, we cannot resolve to have the Simple and Progressive merely for options, and operate on a memorized rule that some verbs are not to be used with the Progressive.
I’m loving you,
is not the same as saying
I don’t love you.

I’m hating you,
is not the same as saying
I hate you.

Feel welcome to the Grammar Web Log:
Time in the mind and heart

If her skill was taken for supernatural, the world may never have seen her original handwriting. Feel welcome to Poems by Emily Dickinson prepared for print by Teresa Pelka: thematic stanzas, notes on the Greek and Latin inspiration, the correlative with Webster 1828, and the Aristotelian motif, “Things perpetual — these are not in time, but in eternity”.
Electronic format $2.99
E-book | NOOK Book | Kindle
Soft cover, 260 pages, $16.89
Amazon | Barnes & Noble
Hard cover, 260 pages, $21.91
Barnes & Noble | Lulu, full preview

The enclosed piece-by-piece analysis works a criterion to embrace the epsilon, predicate structure, vowel contour, phonemics, person reference in abstract thought, and altogether stylistic coherence. The result supports doubt on fascicle originality. There always is the simple question as well: do we believe Emily Dickinson tried to tell about very exceptional Bees, Ears, or Birds, so peculiar that you write them with capital letters?