4 Hacks That Will Make You Understand Non-Action Verbs (Stative Verbs) Forever

4 hacks that will make you understand non-action verbs (stative verbs) forever

Look at this sign. Is there something wrong with it?

I'm lovin it.

This is a derivative of “i’m lovin it” by Leonid Mamchenkov, used under CC BY.

Think about it carefully. Because you might not be right!

You probably think that there’s a problem with this sentence because “love” is what we call a non-action or stative verb. Non-action verbs are those verbs that we can’t use in the continuous (-ing) form.


I have a cat.


I’m having a cat.

This rule is kind of right. Most of the time.

But of course, it’s a little bit more complicated than that.

Today I want to answer two questions about non-action verbs:

  1. What’s the logic behind them? Is there a shortcut?
  2. I hear people breaking the rules all the time. Why?


So before we start, I want to give you a statement to really get to the logic behind non-action verbs and why we have them:

Non-action verbs (stative verbs) are about control.

This statement is basically the big secret to understanding when to “-ing” and when not to “-ing.”

Where there’s no control over an action, it’s a non-action verb. So you can’t use the continuous.

That’s because the continuous tenses are all about being in the “driving seat” — about being in control.

It makes sense, right? If you say something simple like, “I’m feeding the sharks,” then this is something you have control over.

Your brain is controlling your arm, which is releasing the shark food into the water.

a girl throwing a fish to some sharks

This is a derivative of “throwing a piece of stone.” by mxmstryo, used under CC BY.

You are in control. And that feels good! It’s good to be in control around sharks.

Of course, perhaps feeding sharks is your job, and you feed them every morning. In this case, you would use the present simple tense: “I feed the sharks every morning.”

But the important thing is the control. If it’s possible to control it, it’s an action verb.

So what about things that you can’t control?

This is when you can’t use the continuous. No control means no driving seat, which means no continuous.

So what kinds of things can’t we control?

Well — here is a simple diagram of the general areas of “no control” in English.

Heart | Mind | Existence | Perception

The heart, the mind, existence and perception are the main parts of life that we have no control over — no matter how hard we try.

Let’s look at these in detail, and then see how we can break the rules that we’ve just discovered!

Non-action verb hack #1:

You can't control your heart!

So let’s go back to your shark-feeding job.

a girl throwing a fish to some sharks

This is a derivative of “throwing a piece of stone.” by mxmstryo, used under CC BY.

Maybe you feed the sharks every day.

Maybe you’re feeding the sharks right now.

But how do you feel about it?

Personally, I would feel great about it. I would love feeding the sharks.

Can I control this feeling? Absolutely not. You can’t control what you like and what you don’t like. So verbs about liking (and not liking) are non-action verbs. That means no continuous tenses for these verbs:

I love feeding the sharks. (I’m loving feeding the sharks.)

I like feeding the sharks. (I’m liking feeding the sharks.)

I hate feeding the sharks. (I’m hating feeding the sharks.)

I want to feed the sharks…

OK. But what if we want to say that we like something but only now. Like… I like it now, but I usually don’t like it?

We have a useful verb for this. Although it’s about our heart, we can actually use it in the continuous tense. Let’s call it a “useful exception.”

This verb is “enjoy.”

We can use it how we want. So instead of:

I like feeding the sharks. But only today, because it’s sunny.

You can say:

I’m enjoying feeding the sharks today.

Instead of:

I love feeding the sharks. But only today, because Bruce is here.

You can say this:

I'm really enjoying feeding the sharks. Hi, Bruce!

This is a derivative of “throwing a piece of stone.” by mxmstryo, used under CC BY.

And instead of saying:

I hate feeding the sharks. But only today, because Bruce isn’t here.

You can say:

I’m really not enjoying feeding the sharks. I miss Bruce.

So there you have it — “enjoy” is the useful verb we can use to express our temporary feelings.

OK. Got it. Can I break the rules now?


There’s a phrase that has been getting more and more popular over the years. It’s a phrase that serious grammar people would hate but so many people use because it actually serves a real purpose.

Imagine your colleague walks into work with a completely new hairstyle.

She looks awesome and you want to tell her so.

Some people would probably notice the new hair immediately and say something like, “I love the new hair.”

Other people, like me, may be a little quieter about it. But we like the hair and want to tell her.

It might be a week later, so normally, that would be too late to say you like the hair, right?

That’s when this phrase can come in use:

Hi, Jem. By the way, loving the new hair. || Thanks!

It’s a way of saying, “I love the new hair. Even though I didn’t say it before, I’ve liked it all this time.”

Useful, right?

Non-action verb hack #2:

You can't control your brain.…sometimes

You think you can control your brain? Really?

Well, can you control:

  • …what you believe?
  • …what you understand?
  • …what you know?
  • …who you know?


When we believe something — that’s it, right? We can’t “unbelieve” it. It’s the same with “understand” and “know.”

What about the things we can control with our brain?

Well, of course. There are some verbs we can control and as a result, they’re action verbs, so we can use the continuous:

I'm concentrating on this spoon really hard right now.

The most interesting example of this control/no-control dynamic is with the verb “think.” Take a look at these examples:

I think this cat is just tooooo cute.

I'm thinking of a cute cat

See the difference?

Non-action verb hack #3:

You can't control your existence.…or a thing can’t control its existence

“To be, or not to be.”

Yep — that’s right. It’s either one or the other.

Hamlet is a great example of someone who has no control over himself. He’s like the non-action verb pop star.

You either exist or you don’t. This is pretty simple, right?

So that works for people:

He’s a doctor.

And that’s also why “have” is a non-action verb — you have no control over what you have.

I have the most beautiful guitar in the world!

I suppose you could just throw the guitar away. But you just wouldn’t, would you?

This is also the case with objects. Objects can’t control… well, most of them can’t really control anything at all.

So we have words like “consist”:

The whole band consists of old women.

And “contain” or “include”:

contains almonds, cashew nuts, hazelnuts and pecans

Or “weigh” and “measure”:

The box measures 5 metres by 7 metres and weighs 140 kilograms. But what's in it? || Nothing, mate. It's just an empty box.

…anything we use to describe what an object is.

OK. Got it. Can I break the rules now?

Of course.

I wouldn’t actually go as far as saying this is breaking the rules, but there are strong exceptions to the rule.

Like “be.”

“Be” is the ultimate “existence” verb. It’s entire meaning is… EXIST!

But we can actually use it to describe temporary actions.

Let’s look at Jamie, the dog.

He’s usually really chilled out:

a relaxed dog and a bee

But this is him now:

a crazy dog

I think it’s because he got bitten by a bee. Now he’s being noisy and aggressive.

So — when we describe people’s (or dogs’) temporary behaviour, we can use “be” in the continuous.

Another big example of exceptions is with the verb “have.”

Remember, that “have” can mean “possess,” like with the best guitar in the world.

But it can also be like “do.” We use this in soooooo many ways, but here are some examples:

No, I’m not having a barbecue. I’m at work.

He can’t talk to you now. He’s having a shower.

People have been having fights here for 40 years now.

Non-action verb hack #4:

You can't control your perception(except you can, like… half of the time)

OK. Perception.

The interesting thing about perception is that it’s both voluntary and involuntary at the same time.

That means that you can both control it, and you also can’t at the same time.

I remember when I was a kid and I was thinking about this sort of stuff for the first time.

I thought, “It’s interesting that if I don’t want to see anything, all I have to do is close my eyes and that’s it. But if I don’t want to hear anything there’s not much I can do. I can put my fingers in my ears, but that doesn’t really solve it.”

Then I really started thinking about it more and realised that even when I close my eyes, I haven’t turned off my eyes. I can still see something — it’s just the inside of my eyelids.

Then I decided to stop thinking and start playing with the cat.

All of these thoughts I had as a kid have a direct connection to how we use “perception” verbs in English.

For each of the two main senses (seeing and hearing), we have two verbs. One of them is non action, the other is an action verb:

Non-action verbAction verb
seelook at
hearlisten to

We can control what we look at (by moving our eyes/head) but we always see something. Even if it’s the inside of our eyelids.

Now when we look at all the senses, things get a bit more complicated.

Take a look at this picture:

I'm looking at your report and... What can I say? It looks awful.

Notice how he uses the verb “look” twice. Once for “I’m looking at your report,” and once for the report: “It looks awful.”

This is something we can do with the “5 senses” verbs. We can use them for ourselves — this is when we have control. (“I’m looking at your report.”)

And we can use them for the thing that we’re perceiving — this is when there’s no control. (“It looks awful.”)

I'm looking at your report and... What can I say? It looks awful.

Here’s an example for each sense:

The senses: action and non-action verbs

OK. Got it! Can I break the rules now?

You can!

Let’s look at these one by one:


As you saw above, “hear” is a non-action verb. We have no control.

Except when it comes to this particular phrase…

Check out this conversation:

What was that? || What was what? || No, don't worry. I'm hearing things.

“I’m hearing things.”

What’s going on here? Why did she say that?

You know that feeling when you think you hear something… but it was all in your head?

This usually happens when you’re frightened, or when you’re expecting to hear something.

That’s when we break the rule with this phrase.


Remember our lovely couple from back in April?

a couple leaving their wedding

Such a nice couple, right?

Let’s listen to what their friends are saying about them:

“Jo and Emma are perfect for each other. How long had they been seeing each other before they got married?”

You guessed what it means, right?

If you’re “seeing someone,” it means you’re in a relationship with them. It’s a little less formal than being in a serious relationship, but a bit more serious than “dating.” (I’m British, so I have no idea how this “dating” thing actually works — but I know it’s kind of informal…)

OK. So let’s go back to that image from the beginning:

I'm lovin it

Would you say it’s correct?

Think about your answer first, then let me know in the comments and give a reason for your answer. (Make sure you scroll down to the comment box.)

Want more? Get a free month of Gymglish, a daily English workout with a fun, engaging narrative and personalised corrections. Get it here.

23 thoughts on “4 Hacks That Will Make You Understand Non-Action Verbs (Stative Verbs) Forever

  1. Thankyou but i have a question
    “The icecream is melting .”
    Icecream can’t control melting
    Please explain this for me . stative n dynamic verb is so hard to me .
    Thank you for this article

    1. Oooohhhh… Good question!
      I think it’s something to do with the fact that “melt” is one of those verbs that can have a SVO form or just a SV form. Let me explain:

      You can say “He’s closing the door,” right? There’s control there. But we can also say that “the door is closing.” Although we’ve totally changed the subject (from the object) we’re using the same verb for the same situation.

      This is the same as verbs like “cook” — “I’m cooking the chicken” vs. “the chicken is cooking,” — “stop” — “He’s stopping the car” vs. “the car’s stopping” and, of course, “melt” — “the sun is melting the ice cream,” and “the ice cream is melting.”

      I’m not 100% sure on this, but I think that because we can use these verbs with control (“I’m cooking the chicken”) then we can also use them when we do that strange thing where we change the subject (“The chicken is cooking.”) It’s weird, I know, but I think that’s why…

      Hope that helps!

      1. One of my replies got lost I think.
        So, again, stative verbs have to do with state of being rather than control only. Control idea is just to understand it in somewhat easier words although not always valid, it makes it easier for a schooler at least. The actual thing is that stative verbs are those verbs which express a state of being, thinking, heart, etc., in which there is no dynamicity. Which means they are the same when they happen, e.g., someone sees Lake Saif ul Muluk and says “I like it a lot.” Now, here the verb liking is not dynamic, i.e., it is not an action that happens sequentially; it is an instantaneous type of verb. The control idea cannot cover all situations; for example, in “I am sweating due to the sun,” although the proces is pretty much automatic and the subject has no control over it, yet it is something that has a series of events; or in other words, this is a verb that is dynamic (temporally and incrementally happening).

    2. “The new Ford is selling badly.” — is the same.
      It’s also a pseudo-passive, I think.
      Google (in brackets): “My teacher had her briefcase stolen yesterday….”

      1. Yeah — “sell” is another good example: “This shop sells Marmite.”

        However, it’s not the pseudo-passive because it’s not a passive tense. But you were definitely thinking in the right way. The pseudo-passive is also about things happening without any control. The shop doesn’t control the selling and, in the case of “I had my house burgled,” I didn’t control the burgling.

        Nice, switched-on thinking though.

      2. So, actually, ‘stative’ are something that do not change over time, while dynamic change with the passage of time. Stative are kind of state of being and not really something that is temporally or dynamically happening.

    3. Only verbs predicated to conscious beings may be divided into stative and dynamic. Since ice-cream is unable to control anything at all its verbs may be used in continuous. stative verbs have something to do with the conscious control over the act and sequential process of the action. For example in the sentence, “I am sweating due to the sun,” I may not have a conscious control over the situation but the process is sequential, i.e., it is not a momentary (unchanging) situation. In other words, it is dynamic because their is a series of events that constitutes the action of ‘sweating’.

  2. Yes, Gabriel, I’d say it’s correct.
    And when someone, whom you really care for, says this motto, you should act on his or her behalf, and as quick as possible, because what it really means: “i’m no longer in control of my appetite even when i’m not hungry — i’m an addict of junk food — please, help me!” Well, maybe not like this. It depends, really. ;-)

    Another example is: “your comment is awaiting moderation” — in other words, it’s screaming with anticipation to be approved. ;-)

    Oh, yeah, it’s really important to know the difference between ‘being stupid’ and ‘acting stupid.’ You ought not to screw up like Leonard. ;-)

    And here’s the question, it’s a saying ‘Forget it.’ How can someone “unknow” something, right?

    Uh, uh, uh, and what about: “They are hooking up”? Are they friends with or without benefits? I’m always baffled. ;-)


    1. A lot of food for thought there, I’m sure we’ll agree :D

      I totally agree with the fact that if someone really starts speaking in corporate slogans, it may be time for an intervention.

  3. Re: Your report looks awful (or else).
    That’s because the report is a static thing. But the person in charge (looking at the monitor screen) might report to the patient: “Everything’s looking good.”

    1. Great example and that really got me thinking.

      I think this is a case of the “temporary aspect” trumping the “stativeness” of the verb. When you say “everything’s looking good,” or “Hey, you’re looking a bit down” we want to stress the temporary nature of it.

      1. In other words — “making an impression”, right?
        And what about: “I’m not buying it” instead of “I don’t believe it”?

        1. I think so, yes.

          I like the “I’m not buying it” example, too. It’s also like “I’m not getting it” as well — they’re kind of strategies we use when we want to express our lack of belief in some sort of temporary way.

          Also — “I’m not buying it” is kind more like “You’re not convincing me (but you might)” rather than simply “I don’t believe it.”

          Make sense?

          1. Yes, it does. Totally. It’s very interesting and an easy sell, thank you.
            As always, the devil is in the… aspect. :-)

  4. Hey Gabriel,
    First of all, I’d like to say a massive thanks for the great articles you’ve posted so far. I’m a big fan of your work as I can really see what you’re trying to do. It’s always great to have native-speakers like you trying to give an insight or pinpoint the English logic behind confusing grammar phenomena such as stative verbs. The “control” aspect had me thinking though, as it applies to most real life examples you’ve put, but I’m not quite sure about one thing. When you say something like “I have a dog” it shows possesion, something that you wanted (and still want) and got for yourself. You are in control of having a pet, otherwise if you didn’t you would have got ridden of it. Same as with “I’m a teacher”. I am one because I still want to be , so I’m in control of this “state”. It’s not like the teaching position is in control of itself or even me. Would you care to explain further as I’m puzzled with the contradiction here. Thank you in advance.

    1. Hi Zavier,

      First of all thanks for the positive feedback. Yes! Getting to the underlying logic and the ‘instinct’ of the language is exactly what I’m trying to do. I’m glad it’s benefiting you!

      So yeah — the “have” issue. I agree that it’s definitely a tricky one and that it may be an exception to the rule. In this case, instead of asking “is there control?” we should be looking a bit deeper and asking “why isn’t this temporary?”

      Then it gets a bit easier to see why it’s stative, right? I mean — sure, we can get rid of the dog (ethically, I hope!), but there’s something about this situation that makes the difference between having it and not having it much bigger than the difference between, say, eating a banana and not eating it.

      The same goes for ‘being a teacher.’ Not being a teacher (or becoming not a teacher? :) ) is more than just about quitting — some teachers would say that teachers are born teachers and will be teachers for life! Compare that to kicking a tree.

      I know that wasn’t the cleanest answer, but I hope it helps clarify it a little better.

      And thanks for the question — difficult questions are my favourite questions!

      1. My two kopeks (causative):
        Michael Scott: “A couple of months ago, Dwight tried to go behind my back with Jan and get my job. And I am now having him do my laundry as punishment.”

        1. Yep. Not stative at all.

          “Have” is basically the same as “get” in this case.

          “Have” is also non-stative in all sorts of collocations: “He’s having a haircut,” “We’ll be having dinner around then,” “We’re having the best time ever!”

          1. In other words, ‘have’ is an example of [a href=”https://clck.ru/F2PAS”]causative[/a] voice, right? Like: ‘I challenge you to find’, [a href=”https://clck.ru/F2PBv”] in here[/a] ?

          2. OK. So yes — it can be an example of causative. But not in my examples.

            “We’ll be having dinner …” is using “have” to mean “eat.” So not stative.

            “He’s having a hair cut” is a bit different from “He’s having his hair cut,” which is passive.

  5. “You think you can control your brain? Really? Well, can you control:
    …what you believe?
    …what you understand?
    …what you know?
    …who you know?”

    All of this can say more simple. We are is it. Esse Homo.

  6. Wowww this is what I have been looking for! clear explanation with a sense of humor.
    It was such a complicated topic with rules being applied just half the time :-D

    Thank you! You are the best!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *