I red somewhere that "see" doesn't form present participle. Is it true? For exemple in sentence:

  1. I'm seeing my doctor today.

We use -ing form. Can we call it present participle in sentence or should we call it differently?

  • 1
    Seeing that you've successfully used a present participle of 'see', I conclude that you have disproved the statement. Sep 8, 2015 at 19:00

2 Answers 2


Your example used "seeing" as a present continuous to indicate immediate future. It is NOT used as a participle.


A participle is a verb form used as an adjective.

  • a seeing-eye dog

  • the all-seeing God


But, we say a sighted person (meaning not blind), rather than a seeing person. Perhaps that's what your friend meant.

  • We form the present continuous by using the verb BE and the present participle! That's what that word is!!! The Present Continuous is the name for the construction, which includes both BE and the participle. Your point about not using the participle of BE as an attributive modifier is however, insightful and correct. Sep 10, 2015 at 12:48
  • - well kind of correct. After all we have all-seeing Sep 10, 2015 at 12:52

No, that is not true. Almost all verbs can be formed into an -ing form. Seeing is perfectly acceptable.

The main exceptions are the helping verbs, such as can, could, will, would, ought, may, might, shall, and should, and the defective verb beware, which itself can only be used in imperative and infinitive forms.

  • Modal verbs have no infinitive, no past participle, no endings as -s or -ing. I have never seen an imperative of a modal verb.
    – rogermue
    Sep 9, 2015 at 6:14
  • I should have been more clear: "Beware" can only be used in imperative/infinitive. Sep 9, 2015 at 6:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .