English Language Learners Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for speakers of other languages learning English. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I am doing teaching
A teacher told me that it's totally incorrect.
I thought that we may use "double participle" together. But I think "teaching" is a noun over here. As I am doing work. "Work" is a noun, similarly, I took my original sentence like it but I am still unclear about it. I will be thankful to you if you explain it to me nicely.
I am doing teaching.
is grammatically correct.
I is the subject of the main clause.
am is a helping verb where the verb tense is present continuous.
doing is the main verb. It is the *present participle" of to do.
teaching is the direct object. It is the present participle of *to teach".
sentence structure:
(noun) + (helping verb) + (main verb) + (direct object)
notes:
Both doing and teaching are present participles. However, present participles have the ability to be 3 parts of speech: noun, verb, and adjective.
In this case, the doing present participle is a verb.
the teaching present participle is a noun (aka a gerund).
sentences with the same sentence structure:
I am doing homework.
I am doing a marathon in December.
etc.
Yes, you can use doing + teaching together. Here is an example that might make your teacher feel more comfortable:
I'm doing some private teaching in the afternoons this year, so I won't be able to meet with you after school. Why don't you stop by my classroom during your lunch period?
Your teacher may feel that beginning and intermediate students need some simplification.
It's not ungrammatical, as other answers mention, but it is not what most people would say.
Using the Corpus of Contemporary American English, I get 2 results for "doing teaching".
The phrase that I would use is "I'm teaching"; "am teaching" gives 51 hits.
Both phrases use the present continuous tense. However, the first phrase is uncommon due to the horror aequi principle:
The horror aequi principle involves the widespread (and presumably universal) tendency to avoid the repetition of identical and adjacent grammatical elements and structures. — Gunter Rohdenburg, “Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English”, in Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf, Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, 2003.
(There are some great answers about this principal here, including this one.)
In other words, it's not wrong because it's ungrammatical; it's "wrong" because it's in violation of the horror aequi principal.
