If you get high you are stoned but no one ever says "Ah, yeah, this weed is stoning me so much right now." or "I'm going to stone after work."
Stoners don't stone. We have evolved a verb with only one tense.
Stoners don't stone. We have evolved a verb with only one tense.
Okay, multiple people are trying to explain with varying levels of politeness that "stoned" is an adjective like quirks of etymology is not my thing.
Yes, that's the function it performs. And? Nothing to do with my point.
Yes, that's the function it performs. And? Nothing to do with my point.
The word "stoned" in this sense originated in the same metaphorical usage as "hammered" or "blitzed" or "wasted". It wasn't particular to marijuana but more often used in reference to getting really drunk. The verb being adjectived was "to stone" as in "throw rocks at".
BUT as "stoned" became strongly and peculiarly (though not exclusively) associated with marijuana, it took on a life of its own unrelated to its general meaning for excessive intoxication. The association with being bludgeoned to an insensible state a la "hammered" attenuated.
It's now arguably a dead metaphor compared to "hammered" or "wasted". At the same time, we call the people who get stoned "stoners", implying an activity, an action, a verb.
So now we have a notional verb, one that was never used in actual everyday English...
So now we have a notional verb, one that was never used in actual everyday English...
...but which exists only in the past tense, used as an adjective, or in the people who perform the action, who... do not perform the action.
It's interesting to me.
Is that not interesting to you?
It doesn't have to be.
It's interesting to me.
Is that not interesting to you?
It doesn't have to be.
But do not come to me to explain parts of speech to me like I'm a middle schooler just because you can't see what's interesting about it.
