'government-provided house' is it correct?

[jennie77]

He won an all-expenses-paid 5 day-trip to Fiji.
Compared with the sentence above, "government-provided house" seems to sound akward. Isn't " government-providing house" better? For it is the government that provides the house.

Thank you in advance.

[justlovelyfriends]

"government-provided house" sounds wells for me because it is similar to "all-included-fare", taxes-free-shopping". These expressions describe the house, fare and shops (provided by the government, all expenses included, without taxes.

:)

[oishii]

Hi jennie77,

You may also consider using the word 'housing' which pretty much means that the government is providing a place to live... whether it be a house or a flat/ an apartment...

So if you mean that the government is providing a shelter in the form of a house, then 'government-provided housing' is an expression that is often used in the States.


.

[danmahaffey]

When the noun-verb combination is used to modify another noun, the verb form should be the past participle.

For this question, government provided house is the correct choice.

True, the government is providing the house, but the logic of the verb is that the government has provided the house.

In a way, it is a passive voice modifier: a house provided by the government = a government provided house.

To take Oishii's suggestions a step further, housing can be a single house, or an entire village. For example, the governor of our state lives in a mansion in the best part of town among all the rich people. It is really government provided housing. Married soldiers and their families live in a complex of small houses on the army base that is government provided housing. Very poor families that cannot afford homes of their own must live in large apartments that are government provided housing.