A adjective taking an object.

Question

Some adjectives, especially adjectives expressing felling or thought, use the preposition 'of' to take an object and is used as a complement as in the following sentence.

I'm sure of the existence of ghosts.
I'm very afraid of snakes.
I'm so proud of myself to cook such a delicious cake.
We are short of chemicals.
He is critical of what you made.

1) It is a play productive of the strongest emotions.

In the above sentence, even though the underlined adjective isn't used as complement, it take an object using 'of'.
How come there are adjectives like that?

GPY · Accepted Answer

It means "It is a play that is productive of the strongest emotions". I'm not sure whether this answers your question?

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you Mr.GPY for your kind answer.

I kinda see your meaning.

Did You mean the like of the following sentences by your answer?
1) Jane is a girl (that is) very afraid of snakes.
2) We live in the strict (that is) short of chemicals.
3) He is a critics (that is) critical of what you made.
4) Tom is that man (that is) so proud of myself to cook such a delicious cake.

#1 is the ungrammatical sentence.

GPY · Answer

park sang joonDid You mean the like of the following sentences by your answer?1) Jane is a girl (that is) very afraid of snakes.2) We live in the strict (that is) short of chemicals.3) He is a critics (that is) critical of what you made.4) Tom is that man (that is) so proud of myself to cook such a delicious cake.#1 is the ungrammatical sentence.

The sentence that is ungrammatical in the respect relevant to your question is #2, not #1. #3 is ungrammatical but only because of what appears to be a typo, "critics" for "critic". #4 doesn't make sense (mixup with "Tom" and "myself").

I prefer "who" to "that" in #1, #3 and #4.

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you Mr.GPY for your kind answer

I made many mistakes; I'm sorry.
Is there a reason #2 is ungrammatical?

GPY · Answer

park sang joonIs there a reason #2 is ungrammatical?

"We live in the strict (that is) short of chemicals" would grammatically require "strict" to be a noun, whereas it is in fact an adjective. However, it is not clear to me anyway what the sentence was intended to mean, or what noun word could sensibly replace "strict".

Park sang joon · Answer

I'm sorry; I would have written 'district' <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/6.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/6.gif' alt='Emotion: sad'/>

GPY · Answer

Oh, I see!

Fivejedjon · Answer

park sang joonI'm sorry; I would have written 'district'

I should have written ...

Park sang joon · Answer

I know the spelling of 'district'; I thought 'district' in mind then <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/6.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/6.gif' alt='Emotion: sad'/>

A adjective taking an object.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions