welcomed vs. welcome
- Thread starter nowall
- Start date
nowall said:
No difference, just a matter of taste. Grammatically, in the first "welcome" is an adjective modifying "questions." In the second "welcomed" becomes part of the passive form of the verb "to welcome."
Sorry Ican't seem to find the original post but after thinking about this,I feel that "Questions are welcome", does not sound 100%. You can say "I welcome questions", but "Questions are welcomed" sounds better being that there's more that one "question". Maybe I'm wrong though.....
kooka said:
Do you mean that people are 'welcome', but things (such as questions) are 'welcomed', maybe?
Grazie da
Marta
In my humble opinion, "questions are welcome" sounds just fine.
I don't see a difference. Besides, in spoken English the final 'd' would be subtle in this case. Because I don't see a difference, I wouldn't pay attention to which one you decided to say--I get the same idea in my head!
-M
-M
Most people would say welcome and not welcomed in Australia mainly because it's easier to say.
When it comes to language we will always use the shortest and the easiest way of saying anything. In fact they say that the reason why the Australian accent has become what it is today is because we need to speak as quickly as possible with our mouths closed to prevent flies from entering and being swallowed.
When it comes to language we will always use the shortest and the easiest way of saying anything. In fact they say that the reason why the Australian accent has become what it is today is because we need to speak as quickly as possible with our mouths closed to prevent flies from entering and being swallowed.
I am tending toward "welcomed." I am not a grammar expert, so I am not going to try to diagram the sentence. But there is another way to get at "correct" usage. Let's substitute other words that would work as the same part of speech.
Questions are welcome / welcomed.
Questions are desire / desired.
Questions are invite / invited.
Questions are solicit / solicited.
As you see, "welcomed" fits the pattern better than "welcome." It's a verb in the passive voice; much more obvious with words like desired, invited, and solicited.
The thing that makes this tricky, I think, is when we think of the sentence in active voice:
I welcome questions.
I desire questions.
I invite questions.
I solicit questions.
I can't explain the parts of speech very well because I just don't know grammar that well. But I think I've made a strong case for using "welcomed" in this context.
-M
Questions are welcome / welcomed.
Questions are desire / desired.
Questions are invite / invited.
Questions are solicit / solicited.
As you see, "welcomed" fits the pattern better than "welcome." It's a verb in the passive voice; much more obvious with words like desired, invited, and solicited.
The thing that makes this tricky, I think, is when we think of the sentence in active voice:
I welcome questions.
I desire questions.
I invite questions.
I solicit questions.
I can't explain the parts of speech very well because I just don't know grammar that well. But I think I've made a strong case for using "welcomed" in this context.
-M
I have to agree... "welcomed" seems to fit the case better here if one were to ask me.
I don't see a lot of sense in this argument, since welcome is an adjective, while desire, invite and solicit are not.
Questions are welcome.
I/we take questions gladly. (Don't hesitate to ask questions.)
Questions are welcomed.
Questions are or have been taken gladly.
I/we take questions gladly. (Don't hesitate to ask questions.)
Questions are welcomed.
Questions are or have been taken gladly.
This comment will no doubt make it unanimous; I think you're right!
Hello, I realize that I'm re-opening this topic, but I feel very compelled to reply since this explanation is not correct. AustinMarcos's logic is faulty because s/he assumes that welcome is only a verb, when in actuality, welcome can function as an interjection, a noun, and adjective, or a verb.
In the example given, either welcome or welcomed would work. According to the a dictionary, one of the definitions of welcome as a verb is "to receive or accept with pleasure; regard as pleasant or good". This fits your example, and the verb to welcome is changed to the passive voice of the present tense. Thus, we get Questions are welcomed.
In the same vein, one meaning of welcome as an adjective is defined as "gladly and cordially received or admitted". This definition also fits the bill in your other sentence. Hence, we get Questions are welcome.
In short, both sentences are fully grammatically and syntactically correct, but I believe that most native English speakers anywhere are more likely to choose Questions are welcome over the other option.
"Welcomed" sounds better to me here. But I wouldn't find fault with "welcome."
Per quel che merita, sono d'accordo.
I suppose it's your literal translation of for what it's worth. It should be per quel che vale or per quanto possa valere, actually.
Riparto dall'inizio perché io queste cose non riesco a capirle. Lo stesso mi accade con close e closed. In italiano abbiamo solo "le domande sono benvenute" e "le domande sono chiuse". Quand'è che, in generale, non solo con "questions", bisogna usare close e quando closed? Quando welcome o welcomed?
Last edited:
Most people would say welcome and not welcomed in Australia mainly because it's easier to say.
When it comes to language we will always use the shortest and the easiest way of saying anything. In fact they say that the reason why the Australian accent has become what it is today is because we need to speak as quickly as possible with our mouths closed to prevent flies from entering and being swallowed.
ahahahah fantastic
No, it's not my literal translation: it's straight out of Webster's New World Italian Dictionary. But I'll trust a native's view unless other natives have differing opinions. Thanks for the correction, as ever.
As djweaverbeaver says, "welcome" can be used as an adjective or as a verb. If I was chairing a meeting at which a lecturer had just finshed giving a talk, I might stand up and invite questions by saying "Questions are welcome". It would not occur to me to say "Questions are welcomed".
I have tried to imagine a situation in which I might say "Questions are welcomed". I might well say it if describing a situation at which I was not present. For example, if I was writing a leaflet advertising a series of lunchtime talks which the public could attend, I can imagine writing "After each talk, questions are welcomed from the floor".
But if a person stood in front of an audience and invited questions by saying "Questions are welcomed", I would think it was one of those self-conscious corrections that people make when they suddenly think they might be at risk of breaking a rule of grammar and, in trying not to break it, fall into another error.
I have tried to imagine a situation in which I might say "Questions are welcomed". I might well say it if describing a situation at which I was not present. For example, if I was writing a leaflet advertising a series of lunchtime talks which the public could attend, I can imagine writing "After each talk, questions are welcomed from the floor".
But if a person stood in front of an audience and invited questions by saying "Questions are welcomed", I would think it was one of those self-conscious corrections that people make when they suddenly think they might be at risk of breaking a rule of grammar and, in trying not to break it, fall into another error.
Your explanation was perfect. 'You're welcomed' is an example of 'passive voice'.
Using 'substitution examples' was very pedagogical.
Using 'substitution examples' was very pedagogical.