# I'm loving it.  Continuous form (-ing) with stative verbs.



## majlo

There is a rule that says some verbs cannot be used in continous aspect. These are, among other things, _love, like, understand _etc etc. However, I noticed that native speakers, especially Americans, do use those verbs in continuous aspect. Perhaps, it all started with the McDonald's commercial; I don't know. My question, which is rather directed to those users who can remember as far back as '60s, '70s, '80s and early '90s, is how was it then? Were those verbs often used in continuous aspect as well?

Recently, I came across this phenomenon while watching _The Family Man _movie in which Nicolas Cage said to his wife: "_You're not understanding me"_. Interestingly, I think an explanation accordant with present continuous usage could be provided.


----------



## french4beth

I couldn't find the rule you mentioned, but you're right, the verbs that you listed above never used to be used in the continuous aspect like they are today. It's definitely a recent phenomenon (in the past few years).

I would say that the McDonald's commercial simply reflects that the Americans (and possibly other English speakers) have started using this construction in informal conversation (and yes, I've been around since the 60's).


----------



## susanb

I've heard English teachers using it, but they recognized it wasn't correct.


----------



## virr2

majlo said:


> There is a rule that says some verbs cannot be used in continous aspect. These are, among other things, _love, like, understand _etc etc. However, I noticed that native speakers, especially Americans, do use those verbs in continuous aspect. Perhaps, it all started with the McDonald's commercial; I don't know. My question, which is rather directed to those users who can remember as far back as '60s, '70s, '80s and early '90s, is how was it then? Were those verbs often used in continuous aspect as well?
> 
> Recently, I came across this phenomenon while watching _The Family Man _movie in which Nicolas Cage said to his wife: "_You're not understanding me"_. Interestingly, I think an explanation accordant with present continuous usage could be provided.



McDonald's has nothing to do with it 
You can use verbs like: see, smell, hear, taste, look, love, hate, think in both aspects. They may be (in certain contexts) both static and dynamic verbs.
"I hate Mondays" - I always hate it
"I am hating every minute of it" - it is a transient emotion only


----------



## virr2

"You are not inderstanding me"  - this implies that "better understanding" is possible


----------



## majlo

Yeah, I know, but what I mean is what it was like in the past.


----------



## susanb

When I said that the English teachers considered it not correct I was thinking about the "I'm loving it" expression.
"You are not understanding me" sounds correct as it means "at this right moment"
Is that right?


----------



## JamesM

It's curious how some of these rules come about. I wonder if they are only taught to non-native speakers. I don't remember ever being taught that you could not use these words in continuous present form.

The oldest memory I can dredge up of this usage is from a character on an old spy comedy series from the 60's called, "Get Smart", with Maxwell Smart as secret agent 86. A running gag on the series was a set-up line of, "But Max, you'll be in danger of losing your life every moment of this mission!" (or some such thing). Max's stock reply was, "...and _loving_ it!" 

Also, many childhood games use "I'm thinking" rather than "I think". "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 20" or "I'm thinking of a color. Can you guess what it is?" 

There are a few '60s references for you.

Continuous present has an immediateness to it. "You're not understanding me" refers only to the current conversation. "You don't understand me" refers to a general state of incomprehension.    Ask my children.


----------



## majlo

I'd really appreciate the others' opinions


----------



## Lucretia

Hello,
IMO in this notorious slogan the verb *love *has a different meaning, I mean different from the one in  _I love my puppy_. Here, it's synonymous to *get a kick;* _it's dynamic here._


----------



## majlo

susanb said:


> When I said that the English teachers considered it not correct I was thinking about the "I'm loving it" expression.
> "You are not understanding me" sounds correct as it means "at this right moment"
> Is that right?



Well, one of the basic usages for present continuous is 'an ongoing action around now'. If I'm eating at that food company at a certain time, I'm loving it at that time. That feeling goes away after a while though, that's for sure. So it fits perfectly. Is that right?


----------



## mjscott

JamesM said:


> It's curious how some of these rules come about. I wonder if they are only taught to non-native speakers. I don't remember ever being taught that you could not use these words in continuous present form.
> 
> The oldest memory I can dredge up of this usage is from a character on an old spy comedy series from the 60's called, "Get Smart", with Maxwell Smart as secret agent 86. A running gag on the series was a set-up line of, "But Max, you'll be in danger of losing your life every moment of this mission!" (or some such thing). Max's stock reply was, "...and _loving_ it!"
> 
> Also, many childhood games use "I'm thinking" rather than "I think". "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 20" or "I'm thinking of a color. Can you guess what it is?"
> 
> There are a few '60s references for you.
> 
> Continuous present has an immediateness to it. "You're not understanding me" refers only to the current conversation. "You don't understand me" refers to a general state of incomprehension.  Ask my children.


 
I agree with James M. Where did these rules come from? Are they generated by some agency who is trying to impede the comprehension of English by second-language learners? Are they _created by second-language learners_ in an attempt to encapsulate language and make rules?

As a native speaker, I have no problem with, "I'm loving it." Neither have I a problem with, "I'm smelling it," which usually happens about the time my husband starts apologizing....


----------



## Porteño

A very interesting point James M.  I have just been giving a quick perusal of 'A Practical English Grammar (Thompson & Martinet) which I use with my students and can find no rules which say you can not do something. Rather, at different stages of the book indications are given as to those verbs which normally take the gerund or the infinitive or both. I suppose by a process of deduction one could arrive at a list of those verbs which apparently are not used in any of those cases. However, I don't think you can establish a hard and fast rule.


----------



## Sabelotodo

As a forum member who spoke her first word in 1967 (and is willing to admit it,) I'd say that verbs like _understand_ and _comprehend_ have been used in the present continuous (or present progressive, if you prefer to call it that) for decades at least.

On the other hand I don't think I've heard _like, love_, and _hate_ used in this manner until more recently.  "I'm not hating it," sounds like something that one of the characters from _Seinfeld_ might say, or maybe Fran Dresher of _The Nanny_ (a Jewish character from Long Island.)  Perhaps it's a New York thing?


----------



## Porteño

If I'm not mistaken, the King (Elvis, of course) had a song or a film titled
"_Loving You_" and that had to be back in the 50s.


----------



## zebedee

Sabelotodo said:


> On the other hand I don't think I've heard _like, love_, and _hate_ used in this manner until more recently.


 
How about this context:

"Hello everyone,
We arrived in Athens yesterday and so far have spent the time wandering around the city getting our bearings. *I'm loving every minute of it*."



mjscott said:


> Neither have I a problem with, "I'm smelling it," which usually happens about the time my husband starts apologizing....


 
In that case, you're a more generous lady than I...


----------



## luke_77

JamesM said:


> It's curious how some of these rules come about. I wonder if they are only taught to non-native speakers. I don't remember ever being taught that you could not use these words in continuous present form.
> 
> The oldest memory I can dredge up of this usage is from a character on an old spy comedy series from the 60's called, "Get Smart", with Maxwell Smart as secret agent 86. A running gag on the series was a set-up line of, "But Max, you'll be in danger of losing your life every moment of this mission!" (or some such thing). Max's stock reply was, "...and _loving_ it!"
> 
> Also, many childhood games use "I'm thinking" rather than "I think". "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 20" or "I'm thinking of a color. Can you guess what it is?"
> 
> There are a few '60s references for you.
> 
> Continuous present has an immediateness to it. "You're not understanding me" refers only to the current conversation. "You don't understand me" refers to a general state of incomprehension.  Ask my children.


 
I definitely agree with your point of view and could find a correlation with the italian language. We use to say both "you don't uderstand me"(general) and you're not understanding me"(that precise moment) with the same approach you mentioned!


----------



## whynottail

For the rules about NOT using stative verbs in continuous tenses, see this- http://www.perfect-english-grammar.com/support-files/stative-verbs-list.pdf.  Please note a stative verb is not stative anymore if it comes to describe an action rather than a state.

For example, I think "_You're not understanding me"_ means you are not making an effort to understand what I'm putting across to you. 

I always think _"I am loving it"_ in McDonald's ads is basically wrong in grammar and McDonald's only wants to use it to impress the audience/readers so that they won't forget.   However, if "loving" can mean "getting a kick out of it" as pointed out by Lucretia, then it sounds fine to me.


----------



## ayed

I am not so versed in the English as to give a clear-cut view on such a rule.However, I, for one as I was taught, would say that adding "ing" suggests something "in progress at that moment" or connotes the continuty of something was, has been and is still so.

* A dialect always shares its mother..


----------



## sound shift

I can't imagine myself saying "I'm loving it" as a discrete sentence, though I _might _say "I didn't think I would like gardening but I'm loving it" or something of that sort. I have never referred to, or been taught, any rules about thiis.


----------



## newname

Porteño said:


> A very interesting point James M.  I have just been giving a quick perusal of 'A Practical English Grammar (Thompson & Martinet) which I use with my students and can find no rules which say you can not do something. Rather, at different stages of the book indications are given as to those verbs which normally take the gerund or the infinitive or both. I suppose by a process of deduction one could arrive at a list of those verbs which apparently are not used in any of those cases. However, I don't think you can establish a hard and fast rule.



The part in red is not entirely correct. Section 17, The Present Tenses, does have a part headtitled *Verbs not normally used in the continuous tenses.
Love,like (=enjoy) and hate (=opposite of enjoy) *can be used in the continuous tenses. 'Understand' is not listed, though.

A: Are these pupils understanding me?
B: Yes, they are. And I am thinking you are knowing your pupils better.

Would you (mjscott, in particular) say sentences like these?


----------



## JamesM

I would definitely say A, but not B.  B sounds like Indian English to me.  "Are these pupils understanding me?" would refer to the current moment only. 

As an example, a college professor might be asked to speak about the carbon cycle to a class of high school students.  Midway through his lecture he notices that the students have blank looks on their faces.  He might turn to the high school teacher and say, "Are these pupils understanding me?"


----------



## orlando09

It doesn't seem to me grammatically wrong, but I think it's just that in the past it was not usually used with love and like etc, when you are describing your opinion of something - you would usually have said: I love your T-shirt, for example, not "I am loving your T-shirt". I am loving... might have been more naturally used to tell someone about an experience you have been having, such as learning a new hobby, taking a class etc.


----------



## whynottail

To be honest, JamesM, I really cannot figure out how a person can understand something the current moment and then cannot understand it the next, bearing in mind the continuous tense tells something that is true for the time being and may stop being so some time later.  But since it came from you, a native speaker, I will regard the usage as idiomatic. 

Nevertheless, is there any difference between-

"Are these pupils understanding me?" , and
"Do (you think) these pupils understand what I'm talking about?"


----------



## orlando09

I don't see any difference myself. I would say something like the latter, but it's probably just a personal choice of style.


----------



## whynottail

Orlando09, that makes two of us.


----------



## Thomas1

whynottail said:


> [...]
> "Are these pupils understanding me?" , and
> "Do (you think) these pupils understand what I'm talking about?"


The version with the present continuous is just another way of saying what you wrote below. You simply emphasise the present moment/limited duration in this siutation. Note that you added some information to do the same in the sentence with present simple. The present continuous isn't incorrect. Here's a superb explanation I once got: 



KHS said:


> In order to get a good list of the times when stative  ("non-progressive") verbs are used in the progressive, I checked  Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman's "The Grammar Book." Here are the  specific situations they give (2nd ed, p 121):
> 
> - intensify the emotion expressed by the verb (I'm hating this  assignment.)
> - indicate current behavior as opposed to general description (He's  being rude.)
> - introduce change in states by focusing on differences in degree across  time (I'm understanding less and less about life, the older I get.)
> - show limited duration (Are you understanding this?)
> - emphasive conscious involvement (What we are seeing is a red dwarf  star.)
> - show vividness (One night in the middle of the night, I'm hearing  dripping.)
> - express politeness (Are you liking it?)
> - mitigate criticism (I like the first piano notes, but I'm not liking  it where the strings come in.)
> - avoid imposition (I was just wanting to invite you to a gathering...)
> 
> The difficulty for a non-native speaker, of course, is to determine just  when it's appropriate to use progressive for one of these types of  conditions.





Here are samples from English newspapers.


----------



## kalamazoo

I also am not aware of any rule in English that would apply here.  I agree with other posters that a sentence like "You're not understanding me" is okay when it means right now, during this conversation, and something like "I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10" is also fine because it also means right now, at this moment.The McDonald's ad slogan always seems a little strange to me though.


----------



## orlando09

I think this example sounds a bit Mcdonaldsy: - mitigate criticism (I like the first piano notes, but I'm not liking it where the strings come in.)


----------



## JamesM

whynottail said:


> To be honest, JamesM, I really cannot figure out how a person can understand something the current moment and then cannot understand it the next, bearing in mind the continuous tense tells something that is true for the time being and may stop being so some time later.


 
This is not talking about _temporary _understanding. It's referring to understanding at that moment: _contemporaneous_ understanding. It doesn't refer to the idea that they will not understand a moment from now. It points to whether or not, at this moment, they are understanding what I am saying.



> But since it came from you, a native speaker, I will regard the usage as idiomatic.
> 
> Nevertheless, is there any difference between-
> 
> "Are these pupils understanding me?" , and
> "Do (you think) these pupils understand what I'm talking about?"


 
No, I don't see a difference (and it seems like several others don't, either). Where the difference lies in a different sense of something happening at this moment versus a longer-term relationship.

For example, if my wife says:

"You're not understanding me."

it means that I am not grasping the meaning or importance of what she is saying at the moment. However, if she says:

"You don't understand me."

it means that I do not have a good sense of her as a person, what motivates her or is important to her in general. 

These are very different communications and the second is far more significant than the first.


----------



## newname

JamesM said:


> This is not talking about _temporary _understanding. It's referring to understanding at that moment: _contemporaneous_ understanding. It doesn't refer to the idea that they will not understand a moment from now. It points to whether or not, at this moment, they are understanding what I am saying.
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't see a difference (and it seems like several others don't, either). Where the difference lies in a different sense of something happening at this moment versus a longer-term relationship.
> 
> For example, if my wife says:
> 
> "You're not understanding me."
> 
> it means that I am not grasping the meaning or importance of what she is saying at the moment. However, if she says:
> 
> "You don't understand me."
> 
> it means that I do not have a good sense of her as a person, what motivates her or is important to her in general.
> 
> These are very different communications and the second is far more significant than the first.




Let me sum this up.

You are understanding me = you understand what I am saying.
 Example:
  Teacher to pupil: Are understanding me? Do you understand me? 
 But what would you say?
_Teacher to pupil: Are you understanding this theorem?/Do you understand this theorem?_
You understand me = you understand not only what I am saying but me as a whole.
A: Mr, you don't understand him(you aren't understanding him). He won't take your bribes.

And can I use the verb 'know' the same way?
Context:
 A (to B): When I first met her, I didn't know she liked pop music and knitting. She also loves children.
 B: You are knowing her better (Before I would say: you are getting to know her better)

Is my use of knowing here idiomatic?


----------



## JamesM

newname said:


> Let me sum this up.
> 
> You are understanding me = you understand what I am saying.
> Example:
> Teacher to pupil: Are *you* understanding me? Do you understand me?



Actually, in this context I would use "Do you understand me?"  I know it's confusing, but you are asking what we would say. 



> But what would you say?
> _Teacher to pupil: Are you understanding this theorem?/Do you understand this theorem?_



Here I would use "Do you understand this theorem?" With a theorem, you either understand it or you don't.  The theorem is not something that is occurring in the moment. However, if the teacher were showing a film on the theorem I can imagine the teacher saying, "Are you understanding this part of the film?"  as the film is being shown.  Again, "are you understanding" has to do with what is happening at the moment.



> You understand me = you understand not only what I am saying but me as a whole.



It depends on the context.  For example:

Boss:  From now on you will come to work dressed appropriately.
Employee: I didn't know what I wore was inappropriate, but I won't do it again.
Boss: You understand me, then.

This means "You are fully aware of my expectations." It is not about what is happening at the moment but a change of state.  You didn't understand before.  You understand now and from here on out.



> A: Mr, you don't understand him(you aren't understanding him). He won't take your bribes.



This sounds perfectly idiomatic to me. 



> And can I use the verb 'know' the same way?
> Context:
> A (to B): When I first met her, I didn't know she liked pop music and knitting. She also loves children.
> B: You are knowing her better (Before I would say: you are getting to know her better)
> 
> Is my use of knowing here idiomatic?



Not in my version of English.


----------



## whynottail

I hate to say this, and to emphasise, I'm hating myself in saying this - I give up.

But my thanks to JamesM, Thomas1, KHS and others are just the same.


----------



## orlando09

whynottail said:


> For the rules about NOT using stative verbs in continuous tenses, see this- http://www.perfect-english-grammar.com/support-files/stative-verbs-list.pdf.  Please note a stative verb is not stative anymore if it comes to describe an action rather than a state.
> 
> For example, I think "_You're not understanding me"_ means you are not making an effort to understand what I'm putting across to you.
> 
> I always think _"I am loving it"_ in McDonald's ads is basically wrong in grammar and McDonald's only wants to use it to impress the audience/readers so that they won't forget.   However, if "loving" can mean "getting a kick out of it" as pointed out by Lucretia, then it sounds fine to me.



I just looked at your link. I think that is a helpful distinction. However it rather tantalisingly puts an asterisk next to "loving it" and then there is no reference anywhere as to what this refers to!

Also there was the example someone gave of something like: we arrived in Athens on holiday yesterday... I am loving every minute of it

or eg: Are you enjoying your language course? Yes, I'm loving it. Or perhaps "Are you liking your course so far? Yes, I'm liking it a lot.

But perhaps these can be put under your "getting a kick out of" heading.. I guess like and love are more blurry in terms of the state/action distinction than some other ones in your link.


----------



## Andygc

orlando09 said:


> Also there was the example someone gave of something like: we arrived in Athens on holiday yesterday... I am loving every minute of it
> 
> or eg: Are you enjoying your language course? Yes, I'm loving it.
> 
> Or perhaps *Are you liking your course so far?* _*sounds unnatural*_ but _How are you liking your course so far?_ would work as an informal question
> 
> *Yes, I'm liking it a lot.*  Only if you are Peter Sellers in face paint and a turban.


----------



## JamesM

Andygc,

Please take a look at these hits:

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=%22but+I%27m+liking+it+a+lot%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=1bb621fe63d3cc98

"I'm liking it" is not uncommon, at least in American English.  The list shrinks down to 2 hits if you add a restriction of UK sites.  It may be that it's an AE-specific phrase but it  certainly doesn't mean that you have to be Peter Sellers (here in the U.S.) to utter it.


----------



## orlando09

I was less sure about the liking examples the more I reread what I said, and I kind of agree with your comments (that you probably wouldn't generally say them); but it is hard to say grammatically why the liking examples are different from the loving ones.. but never mind.


----------



## Andygc

JamesM said:


> Andygc,
> 
> Please take a look at these hits:
> 
> "I'm liking it" is not uncommon, at least in American English.  The list shrinks down to 2 hits if you add a restriction of UK sites.  It may be that it's an AE-specific phrase but it  certainly doesn't mean that you have to be Peter Sellers (here in the U.S.) to utter it.


I can accept that - but I can't read it in a BE context without using the type of accent that Peter Sellers would have used.


----------



## MikeLynn

Hi, I know that rules of languages are really flexible, if there are any_(of course, there are)_, once you are a native speaker. For me it takes something like creating my own "virtual reality" to get as close as possible to the feel. As _love_ in my language seems to be a very powerful expression, it's even something incredibly strong and emotional or just a sheer lip service, while in English it seems to be used a lot more freely, so I've developed a concept of _love=like it very, very much_. Do you think that I could understand _I'm loving it_ as _I'm enjoying it very, very much_?
Just a quick note to help you understand what I mean-an American friend of mine when we were talking about these love and like differences and he asked me when my parents last told me they'd love me, I told him that never, because they'd "just" _liked me a lot_. Thanks a lot for your input
M&L


----------



## JamesM

Yes, I think "I'm enjoying it very, very much" is a good interpretation of "I'm loving it".


----------



## MikeLynn

Thanks a lot JamesM, it really helps. My nephew is bilingual-Czech and English, English is his first language and when being with him, I could tell what I'd been missing-all those "little words" from your parents and family when you are a kid, and all the funny talks with your lover(s) that give you a pretty good idea of how deep, soothing, loving and whatever your choice of words can be. By the way, although he is fluent in Czech, anytime he was in trouble, he chose English as he felt he was more comfortable and confident as for the precise emotional "color" of his expression


----------



## ayed

The point being discussed reminds me of another example says a sentence likes this:
He is always asking me a pen or a ruler(_implies that the speaker really complains of that behaviour of their classmate.He is fed up with that mate_).


----------



## Prower

This issue is not as easy as it may seem. Speaking of the rule, I should say that there is such a rule which I am aware of and I am pretty sure that it wasn't established in vain. To speak English or any other langauge is possible without rules. But try to speak a foreign langauge without resorting to rules. Or try to teach others without rules. I doubt that anyone can succeed in doing so. Let's look at other verbs meantioned by this rule (yes, we found out that love and like can be used in progressive.

*loath, dislike, prefer, belong, abhor, adore, astonish, believe, desire, detest, doubt, feel, forgive, guess, hear, imagine, impress, intend, know, mean, see etc *

Well how easy do they take -ing being an auxiliary verb?

I am not believing you?
Are you belonging to this team?
I am not forgiving you.
He is doubting.
I am knowing it.

Don't they sound like nonsense?


----------



## MikeLynn

Prower said:


> This issue is not as easy as it may seem. Speaking of the rule, I should say that there is such a rule which I am aware of and I am pretty sure that it wasn't established in vain. _To speak English or any other langauge is possible without rules. But try to speak a foreign langauge without resorting to rules. Or try to teach others without rules. I doubt that anyone can succeed in doing so. Let's look at other verbs meantioned by this rule (yes, we found out that love and like can be used in progressive.
> 
> *loath, dislike, prefer, belong, abhor, adore, astonish, believe, desire, detest, doubt, feel, forgive, guess, hear, imagine, impress, intend, know, mean, see etc *_
> 
> Well how easy do they take -ing being an auxiliary verb?
> 
> I am not believing you?
> Are you belonging to this team?
> I am not forgiving you.
> He is doubting.
> I am knowing it.
> 
> Don't they sound like nonsense?



I hate to do it, but I agree. The only way out, for us non natives, is to devise a sophisticated "virtual reality" system that helps, although it can lead us astray every now and then. Well, still better than a literal translation which is very often a scarecrow impersonating a human being


----------



## Forero

Prower said:


> Well how easy do they take -ing being an auxiliary verb?
> 
> I am not believing you? This looks like a statement with a question mark.
> Are you belonging to this team? This one is a little strange. What is the intended context?
> I am not forgiving you.  This usually means "I shall not forgive you."
> He is doubting. This one needs more context. Doubting what?
> I am knowing it. Context needed.
> 
> Don't they sound like nonsense?


We need more context to make sense out of most of these.

I have never cared for the McDonald's slogan because of the pronoun _it_ with no obvious antecedent. I'm lovin' what? What is supposedly happening that I'm loving (every minute of)?

We have been using present continuous with verbs like _understand_ and _love_ since the 1950s at least, but English-speaking actors are taught to imitate a "Russian" accent by leaving out the word _the_ and misuing _be_ +_ -ing_. By way of example, here are some of the things "Boris", the Russian wolfhound, says in Walt Disney's _Lady and the Tramp_ (1955):

_Quote, miserable being must find more miserable being, then, is happy, unquote. .__.. __Besides, little bublichki, wearing license here that is like waving, you should excuse the expression, red flag in front of bull._
_..._
_Ah, but some day he is meeting someone different, some delicate, fragile creature who is giving him a wish to shelter and protect, ... but when he does, ... the Cossacks are picking him up ...._

What makes this last sentence sound "Russian" is of course not the particular verbs being used but the fact that the present continuous does not fit the context.

I'll guess that non-native English speakers are taught "always say 'I love', never 'I'm loving'" because we only say "I'm loving" when the situation warrants it, which is less often than we say, for example, "I'm going."

I hope this helps.


----------



## JamesM

I can find examples, however, of "I'm liking it/this" from before 1900.  This is not exactly the recent phenomenon that some people seem to think it is.

I can't think of a simple rule.  "He is doubting what she's telling him" sounds fine to me if someone is describing something that he is observing at the moment. For example, it would be a natural response to: "How do you think he is reacting to the news?"  It wouldn't sound natural to me as a description of a general state.


----------



## danielfigfoz

As a teenager, who presumably speaks modern British English, I will tell you that "loving" and "hating" sound strange, unless in response to a question. When stating something without a question, e.g "I'm loving this car" it sounds strange, however "What do you think of the car?" "I'm loving it" sounds more normal.


----------



## Prower

JamesM said:


> I can find examples, however, of "I'm liking it/this" from before 1900.  This is not exactly the recent phenomenon that some people seem to think it is.



*I think* and *I am thinking* have different lexical meanings.


----------



## Prower

Forero said:


> I am not believing you? This looks like a statement with a question mark.


What's the point of using progressive here? What's the difference between 
I am not believing you and I don't believe you?


Forero said:


> Are you belonging to this team? This one is a little strange. What is the intended context?


(I am saying that it's hardly correct with any context.)





Forero said:


> I am not forgiving you.  This usually means "I shall not forgive you."


Is it a planned action for the future?





Forero said:


> He is doubting. This one needs more context. Doubting what?


 (His statement.)





Forero said:


> I am knowing it. Context needed.


Can there be any context which could justify the usage of "am knowing"? My point was that it's not correct in principle.


----------



## lizmag

I agree with what Andygc says.  I would never (dangerous word, that!) say "I'm liking it".  If someone asked me this question:
-"Are you liking it?"
-"Yes, I'm really enjoying it" would be my response.
I love things in the present simple.

However, "think" seems to have two meanings.
"What are you thinking about?" could be a question posed to somebody who is clearly in a reflective mood.  They might say, "I'm thinking about my mum."
"Do you think God exists?" is asking for an opinion.  The response might be, "Yes, I think so."  The present continuous feels entirely incorrect in this instance but, as ever, please correct me if I'm wrong!


----------



## Oxford Teacher

its the difference between dynamic and stative.   If you are actively thinking about what to do next you can say "I'm thinking about my next move". If its an opinion you can't say "I'm thinking its a good idea".  If its a belief its stative and therefore can't be used in the continuous aspect.  

Its the same as things that change then can't be changed back, like understand and know.   So if your confused then are enlightened you say "now I understand" and you can't "be knowing someone".   Understanding and knowing are not things you actively do otherwise getting students to understand English grammar would be so much easier!  You can't understand things just by saying "i'm going to understand" you have to say "i'm trying to understand".  Understand?!!!


----------



## ampurdan

mjscott said:


> Where did these rules come  from? Are they generated by some agency who is trying to impede the  comprehension of English by second-language learners? Are they _created by second-language learners_ in an attempt to encapsulate language and make rules?



_
English Grammar in Use _by Raymond Murphy. Cambridge University Press

Unit 4





> The following verbs are not normally used in the present continuous:
> *like, love, hate, want, need, prefer
> know, realise, suppose, mean, understand, believe, remember
> belong, fit, contain, consist, seem
> *
> (...)
> *See, hear, smell, taste
> *
> We normally use the present simple (not continuous) with these verbs


That's where.


----------



## MikeLynn

Mr. Murphy is still okay, he's just trying to make things a bit easier to understand for people who are not native speakers. I've seen grammar books that said that verbs like _be, see, hear, think, want, love, hate_ and many others are *never* used in continuous tenses, not considering all those different meanings. ..._see_-meaning what?, _think_-meaning what? It's really difficult to use something you can't "feel" and you have to rely on all kinds of sources of information for help.


----------



## JamesM

There are contexts where it would be odd _not_ to use the continuous form, in my opinion:

"I can't believe what I'm hearing!" 
"I can't believe what I hear!" 

(Assuming I am referring to something being said at the moment)


----------



## MikeLynn

Well, JamesM, I've both read and heard these things so many times that it would be impossible to think that they don't exist. The trouble is that for a non-native speaker it can be really tough to choose the right aspect-_progressive_ or _simple_. More examples might help. Any tips for a resourceful website?


----------



## koniecswiata

A lot of "rules"--such as those in the (famous) Raymond Murphy book--are designed to make the language more manageable for learners--which makes sense. Learners need something to hold on to, and grammar is much less slippery when it is packaged into a neat little box.  Of course, we can't forget that these rules are often gross simplifications of reality; this case with the stative vs. dynamic aspect of certain verbs (like, love, etc...) is a good example.
At the end of the day language is much more grammaticalized lexis than lexicalized grammar--in a nutshell, grammar is driven by the particular use of lexical items.  A verb such as love is a good case as it can mean "really enjoy" (I'm loving this hamburger!) as well as "romantically love" (I love you).


----------



## Forero

Oxford Teacher said:


> its the difference between dynamic and stative. If you are actively thinking about what to do next you can say "I'm thinking about my next move". If its an opinion you can't say "I'm thinking its a good idea". If its a belief its stative and therefore can't be used in the continuous aspect.
> 
> Its the same as things that change then can't be changed back, like understand and know. So if your confused then are enlightened you say "now I understand" and you can't "be knowing someone". Understanding and knowing are not things you actively do otherwise getting students to understand English grammar would be so much easier! You can't understand things just by saying "i'm going to understand" you have to say "i'm trying to understand". Understand?!!!


Welcome to the forum, Oxford Teacher.

To me, thinking and understanding are things that can change:


_I'm thinking it's a good idea, but I need a little more time to decide_/_firm up my opinion._
_He's going to think we are nuts._
_I'm understanding you so far, but I'm afraid you are about to lose me._
_Teacher says that at the end of this course I'm going to understand quartic equations well enough to solve them with pencil and paper._
But I do have trouble imagining a proper context for "I'm knowing it", though I won't say none exists. However, I will say that at least certain uses of _be_ and _have_ are entirely stative:

_He was going to the party. 
He was being going to the party. 

They have taken a nap. 
They are having taken a nap. 


_


----------



## 中文效应

Hello everyone.

My grammar book tells me that *I am liking you* and *I am understanding you *are wrong sentences. 
I can`t use present continuous tense with these words like *know, hate, imagine, want.*
But I hear people say *I am loving you*.Is this sentence correct?
If it is correct, what`s difference between *I am loving you *and *I love you?

*Thank you.


----------



## PaulQ

I hear people say *I am loving you*.Is this sentence correct? It is certainly uncommon.

"My grammar book tells me that I can`t use present continuous tense with these words like *know, hate, want.*" Hmmm... I'm not sure that is correct as an absolute rule. Again, in some contexts, they are OK.

"Just a moment, *I am imagining *your wearing a green hat." is a good sentence, 
as is,
A: "Am I speaking too quickly for you?"
B: "No, I'm *understanding *what you are saying."

and

A: "Are you enjoying you English lessons?"
B: "Yes, I'm liking/loving them, although the teacher is bad tempered." "No, I'm hating them; the teacher is bad tempered."

If there is a rule, I cannot think of it.


----------



## 中文效应

Thanks.Owlmans5, PaulQ and Cagey

I found this in another grammar book.
If you mean the progress, you can use present continuous tense with these words.
If you mean the outcome, you can not.
1.He is smelling the chicken.
2.It is smelling nice. 
  It smells nice.
3.I am smelling something burning in the kitchen.
  I smell something burning in the kitchen.

What do you think of it?


----------



## owlman5

中文效应 said:


> Thanks.Owlmans5, PaulQ and Cagey
> 
> I found this in another grammar book.
> If you mean the progress, you can use present continuous tense with these words.
> If you mean the outcome, you can not.
> 1.He is smelling the chicken.
> 2.It is smelling nice.
> It smells nice.
> 3.I am smelling something burning in the kitchen.
> I smell something burning in the kitchen.
> 
> What do you think of it?


I think that grammar book has given you good advice.  I tend to use those verbs just the way your book described them.  Don't be too surprised if you see or hear somebody use "I am smelling something really stinky right now" or some similar sentence.  You don't need to copy that use.  It will be just fine to say "I smell something really stinky right now."


----------



## newname

Owlman5,

From what I observe it seems that stative verbs can be, and are normally, used as dynamic verbs to answer questions. Thus,

You don't seem to understand the lesson.
Quite to the contrary. I am understanding it very well. (Understand would work well, too)
----
You look so preoccupied. What is it in the sky?
I am imagining I am an angel. (I think imagine would not work here)

and so on and so forth

What do you think about this rule? 

Thanks.


----------



## Prower

More or less it's clear. But these two are confusing. POST 60

1.He is smelling the chicken.
2.I am smelling something burning in the kitchen.

Why is it so that the first one is correct and the second one is wrong?


----------



## owlman5

newname said:


> Owlman5,
> 
> From what I observe it seems that stative verbs can be, and are normally, used as dynamic verbs to answer questions. Thus,
> 
> You don't seem to understand the lesson.
> Quite to the contrary. I am understanding it very well. (Understand would work well, too)
> ----
> You look so preoccupied. What is it in the sky?
> I am imagining I am an angel. (I think imagine would not work here)
> 
> and so on and so forth
> 
> What do you think about this rule?
> 
> Thanks.


Hello, Newname.  I think "I am imagining I am an angel" sounds good in that context.  You are using the progressive tense to describe an ongoing process.  In that particular sentence, "I am imagining" seems to have some function - it helps the listener understand that this angel is something that you are in the process of creating as you speak.   In many other situations, the progressive tenses don't add anything useful:  I am smelling something stinky???  I much prefer I smell something stinky.

I'd probably use "I understand it very well" unless I really needed to give my listener the idea that my understanding was an ongoing process.  I don't see much advantage in using "I am understanding it very well" in that situation.


----------



## owlman5

Prower said:


> More or less it's clear. But these two are confusing. POST 60
> 
> 1.He is smelling the chicken.
> 2.I am smelling something burning in the kitchen.
> 
> Why is it so that the first one is correct and the second one is wrong?


"He is smelling the chicken" sounds a little odd to me, Prower.  If I  was commenting on the odor that he was detecting, I'd probably say:  He  smells the chicken.

Once again, I'd reserve the progressive tense for some odd situation  where I wanted to make it painfully clear that his act of smelling  something was an ongoing process.  These situations are very rare in my  experience.  I doubt that I've ever had a need to say "He is smelling X"  rather than "He smells X".


----------



## Prower

Thank you,  owlman5! There is one more sentence which wasn't really tackled in this thread.

I am not beleiving you! - Can it mean: I refuse to beleive you!


----------



## owlman5

Prower said:


> Thank you,  owlman5! There is one more sentence which wasn't really tackled in this thread.
> 
> I am not beleiving you! - Can it mean: I refuse to beleive you!


You are quite welcome, Prower.  I agree that it could mean "I refuse to believe you".  Using "I'm not believing you" with that meaning would be fairly unusual.  Members like you are good at coming up with unusual situations that I've never thought about before.  That's one reason that I like this forum so much.


----------



## Forero

Prower said:


> More or less it's clear. But these two are confusing. POST 60
> 
> 1.He is smelling the chicken.
> 2.I am smelling something burning in the kitchen.
> 
> Why is it so that the first one is correct and the second one is wrong?


There is nothing inherent in the transitive verb _smell_ that prohibits its use in a progressive tense. Both of these sentences are correct, but both require supporting context. 

The second sentence has three _-ing_s in a row, which is unusual too, but also not wrong in itself.

I don't feel right about marking either sentence with a checkmark or an X without more context, in particular, context that explains the situation and which meaning of present progressive/continuous is intended.


----------



## vis_vitalis

<<Moderator note: I have merged vis_vitalis's question with the ongoing thread on the subject. Please scroll to the top to review the discussion so far>>

Is it grammatically correct to say "I am loving you/it, etc.". In grammar books it says that verbs expressing feelings, sense perception and possession are not used in Continuous form. Does the sentence have some special meaning?


----------



## tunaafi

"I'm loving it" is fine.  It is expressing the more limited-duration idea of enjoyment that a deep-seated emotion.


----------



## vis_vitalis

thanks. so I can say it about food,movie,book, etc.,  as it is a temporal enjoyment. If one says to a person, it will not sound offensive?


----------



## jmichaelm

"I am loving it." sounds fine to me. "I am loving you." sounds wrong. It is definitely not idiomatic and will likely cause the listener wonder exactly what you mean.


----------



## JJohnson

Yes, it would be odd. '"I'm loving you" today, but I can't say about tomorrow.'
"I'm loving it" is a slang expression for "I am enjoying this very much."
For instance, "I'm loving it" is an advertising slogan for McDonald's.


----------



## tunaafi

JJohnson said:


> "I'm loving it" is a slang expression for "I am enjoying this very much.



It may not be particularly formal but I wouldn't say it was slang. It's perfectly natural English.


----------



## Sparky Malarky

I am taking a macramé class and *I am loving it.*  This means: I am taking a class, and _so far_ I am enjoying it very much.  I don't know whether I will continue to enjoy it.  I may decide I hate it before I am finished.

As JJohnson says, "I am loving you" sounds like it means "I love you so far, but maybe tomorrow I'll decide I don't really love you after all."  This is hardly a complimentary thing to say to someone.

Generally, "I'm loving it" means "I am enjoying it."  Therefore "I'm loving you" would make you sound like a shallow person who only cares about others as long as they bring you pleasure, unlike "I love you" which signifies a deep, and hopefully permanent, commitment.

Be aware that "loving" someone can also be a euphemism for "having sex with."  So "I'm loving you" could, in context, mean "I'm making love with you."  The sentence *"You're ugly but I forget that when I'm loving you"* means "you're ugly, but I forget that when I'm having sex with you."  It certainly does not mean "I love you."


----------



## vis_vitalis

Hello, everyone. As a freshman I enjoyed my first experinece in the forum and thank you all for your help and input. 
Concerning the chicken ,  
"He is smelling the chicken to see if it's fresh."/ "He is tasting the soup to see if it has enough salt." - these verbs express action not the state that's why they are used in Continuous form. 
"The soup tastes good."/ "The roses smell wonderful." - in these sentences the verbs express state, so are used in Simple tense form. 
The same verb can express both state and action depending on the situation. 
"The box weighs 5 kilos." - state
"I am weighing the box (to see if it is heavy enough to be posted.)" - action
That's how I was taught 
English verbs are so polysemantic and can have different meanings depending on context and sitution. The native speakers will correct me if I am wrong at some point. 
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Forero

vis_vitalis said:


> Hello, everyone. As a freshman I enjoyed my first experinece in the forum and thank you all for your help and input.
> Concerning the chicken ,
> "He is smelling the chicken to see if it's fresh."/ "He is tasting the soup to see if it has enough salt." - these verbs express action not the state that's why they are used in Continuous form.
> "The soup tastes good."/ "The roses smell wonderful." - in these sentences the verbs express state, so are used in Simple tense form.
> The same verb can express both state and action depending on the situation.
> "The box weighs 5 kilos." - state
> "I am weighing the box (to see if it is heavy enough to be posted.)" - action
> That's how I was taught
> English verbs are so polysemantic and can have different meanings depending on context and sitution. The native speakers will correct me if I am wrong at some point.
> Thanks in advance.


A don't think a supposed dichotomy between actions and states tells the whole story.

For example, I might say "The soup is tasting good" about the taste of a soup that may vary from batch to batch or from one tasting to another. And I might say "The roses are smelling wonderful" about roses that may vary in smell.

But "The box is weighing 5 kilos" sounds odd to me, even if "the box" is not always the same box or does not always weigh the same amount.

I don't think how much a thing weighs is more of a state than how a thing tastes or smells. I think the problem with "is weighing 5 kilos" has to do with the relationship between the verb "weigh" and the phrase "5 kilos". The latter has the same form as a direct object, but something is different about it, and the form "is weighing" somehow interferes with processing the intended relationship.


----------



## Brigitte_anna

mjscott said:


> Neither have I a problem with, "I'm smelling it," which usually happens about the time my husband starts apologizing....


Hi! 
I didn't get what it can mean. Can anyone explain?


----------



## Loob

Well, mjscott hasn't visited the forum for several years. But I'm pretty sure the idea is that the husband has just farted.


----------



## Brigitte_anna

Oh, so intimate details


----------



## SevenDays

I wonder if what's also at issue here is the notion of "change of state," as perceived by someone/entity capable of detecting a "change of state:"

_I'm loving it _(change from "not loving it" to "loving it," as far as the speaker is concerned)
_I'm smelling it _(same as above, "not smelling it" --> "smelling it") 
_The box is weighing 5 kilos _(? Can a box _detect _a "change of state," going from "not weighing 5 kilos" to "weighing 5 kilos"?)

And a "change of state" seems to suggest a _recent/abrupt_ "change." A husband saying to his wife "I'm loving you" sounds odd because presumably _loving _someone develops _over time_; we don't go from "not loving wife" to "loving wife" _abruptly. _But there's no "rule" here; language/communication isn't just a matter of syntax; pragmatics/context also counts.


----------



## zaffy

PaulQ said:


> A: "Am I speaking too quickly for you?"
> B: "No, I'm *understanding *what you are saying."
> 
> and
> 
> A: "Are you enjoying you English lessons?"
> B: "Yes, I'm liking/loving them, although the teacher is bad tempered." "No, I'm hating them; the teacher is bad tempered."



Will all native speakers use progressive forms in these two contexts? If I use the simple forms as grammar books say, will I sound unnatural?


----------



## Hermione Golightly

> Will all native speakers use progressive forms in these two contexts? If I use the simple forms as grammar books say, will I sound unnatural?


I'm not sure how far back in the thread you are golng. The last, Seven Day's #81, mentions a good situation in which the simple present _might_ change to the present continuous.
They also say:



> But there's no "rule" here; language/communication isn't just a matter of syntax; pragmatics/context also counts.


I would not change to the continuous: I'd use the simple present with 'now' to mean the/a _current _state.
Nobody could say that is wrong.


----------



## velisarius

> A: "Am I speaking too quickly for you?"
> B: "No, I'm *understanding *what you are saying."
> 
> and
> 
> A: "Are you enjoying your English lessons?"
> B: "Yes, I'm liking/loving them, although the teacher is bad tempered." "No, I'm hating them; the teacher is bad tempered."



I wouldn't use the continuous forms I've put a line through. The simple forms are perfectly adequate to express the meaning. "Yes, I am" would be  a good answer to "Are you enjoying...?"


----------



## kalamazoo

The more natural thing would be to use present simple, not progressive. You might use progressive if you actually in the midst of carrying out an action.  "Did you see Joe's new car?"  "Yes I am actually looking at it right now."  Otherwise, it's not particularly natural.


----------



## zaffy

A Brit was reviewing a car and said "I'm loving this brown metallic paint". Does it even sound natural? Would an AE speaker ever pick the continuous tense in such context?


----------



## ayed

Non-native but the verb _*love *_doesn't take -*ing*


----------



## tunaafi

ayed said:


> Non-native but the verb _*love *_doesn't take -*ing*


It can. Have you read the whole thread?


----------



## Forero

zaffy said:


> A Brit was reviewing a car and said "I'm loving this brown metallic paint". Does it even sound natural? Would an AE speaker ever pick the continuous tense in such context?
> 
> View attachment 37367


Yes, and yes. The sentence is about the speaker's experience at that particular time. He or she was thinking about that car compared to other cars but was leaving room for new expreriences to come (upon reviewing more cars).


----------



## kentix

He is still in thrall to the brown metallic paint. The initial rush hasn't worn off. He is in the middle of that feeling of paint euphoria.


----------



## velisarius

_I'm loving it. It's super cool.  _

Some people do talk like that. Perhaps young people, or people who are pretending to be cool.


----------



## tunaafi

velisarius said:


> _I'm loving it. It's super cool. _
> 
> Some people do talk like that. Perhaps young people, or people who are pretending to be cool.


At 73, I make no attempt to be cool, and I would not utter your second sentence. I have, however uttered, and will continue to utter, the first.


----------



## zaffy

I asked a Brit about what he thinks of "I'm liking it" and "I'm loving it" and this is what he replied:

*"Only idiots use the the word 'liking' or 'loving'. They think it sounds cool - because McDonalds restaurants use it in their advertising.   Honestly, as a native speaker, when I hear "I'm loving" or "I'm liking" I always think the person using sounds  such as 'kurwa' - and the chap in your clip is no exception.  Don't encourage your students to say "I'm loving" or "I'm liking" - it's just plain wrong and very annoying. "

*


----------



## grassy

Perhaps you should explain to your friend Brit what "kurwa" means.    While you're at it, you could also explain to him the difference between "it's" and "its".


----------



## tunaafi

zaffy said:


> I asked a Brit about what he thinks of "I'm liking it" and "I'm loving it" and this is what he replied:
> 
> *"Only idiots use the the word 'liking' or 'loving'. They think it sounds cool - because McDonalds restaurants use it in their advertising.  *


The British person you asked was very judegemental - and wrong.


----------



## sound shift

There's a greater chance of me ('my' if you insist) being struck by lightning than there is of me (ditto) saying "I'm liking it."


----------



## velisarius

sound shift said:


> There's a greater chance of me ('my' if you insist) being struck by lightning than there is of me (ditto) saying "I'm liking it."



I'll be under standing under the same old tree with you when the lightning strikes, sound shift.


----------



## tunaafi

I doubt if I have ever said 'simply "I'm liking it it". However, I have certainly heard/seen, and probably produced "I am liking it more (and more).

As for "I am loving ..." that was used, in the sense of "I am very much enjoying ..." long before McDonalds raised their first arch.


----------



## Andygc

velisarius said:


> I'll be under standing under the same old tree with you when the lightning strikes, sound shift.


Room for one more?


----------



## lingobingo

My take on this…
The continuous aspect is often used with the verbs *like* and (especially) *love*, despite their being stative verbs. The simple present is used to describe how you feel about something _generally_, your ongoing attitude towards it. But the present continuous is used (by some, in the first person, as a modern idiom) not only to describe how you’re feeling _as you speak_ but specifically to express approval or amusement.


----------



## zaffy

Andygc said:


> Room for one more?



That's interesting.  I'm just wondering whether AE speakers will be willing to join you.


----------

