base for this usage

Question

Hi,I do read a lot and sometimes certain sentential patterns throw me off, like this one....use them interchangeably, preferring one to the other for reasons of personal style, appearance of text, and others.How would you classify the nouns 'style' and 'appearance'? The word style in my dictionary was noted as being something to do with being elegant and the word appearance was all noted as a countable noun.

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,

I do read a lot and sometimes certain sentential patterns throw me off, like this one.

...use them interchangeably, preferring one to the other for reasons of personal style, appearance of text, and others.

How would you classify the nouns 'style' and 'appearance'? There are various ways to classify nouns. In what way do you want to classify these?

The word style in my dictionary was noted as being something to do with being elegant That's true. You are talking about the definition of the word.

and the word appearance was all noted as a countable noun. But here you are talking not about definition but about grammar, in terms of 'count/nocount'.

I'm not clear about what you are really asking.. The words 'style' and 'appearance' can be used in both a countable and a non-countable way. In your sentence, they are used in a non-countable, general way.

Please post again if I have not answered the question you have in mind.

Best wishes, Clive

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you, Clive

It is that I and I presume many others would most like rely on the dictionary to figure out the usage of a certain word. Then, you also has to make an allowance for the fact that most, if not all, nouns can be used both countably and uncountably, irrespectively of the categorization by the source I mentioned, at least in the realm of a theory.

I looked at the dictionary for the word 'appearance' and the several definitions and usage examples showed the fact they were based on its countable nature. Normally, it would be safe to assume the word 'appearance' would be used as a countable noun, unless you make a deliberate attempt to make it into types or instances of it.

I cannot think of any case where a deliberate attempt to make into a special or specific instance of a noun would make it countable. Can you give me a few examples? I see plenty of cases where making a noun into types causes it to be used countably, though.

Here are more examples where typical dictionary definitions, if used generically, of them would confuse some unfortunate people who otherwise do not know any better.

in amount or degree

Here, I think you would say the word 'degree' is used generally, not according to its typical definitions. By the way, when you say it is used grammatically, not definitionally, what do you mean? Are you saying grammar of the phrase or sentence dictates a certain usage of the word?

Another example that might create some conflict in the mind of some people who don't otherwise unfortunately know better:

based on color, ***, and race

Here, at least one word, 'race', wouldn't fit nicely with the thinking pattern of someone who unfortunately doesn't know any better.

So, are you saying virtually any word can be used differently (ie. different than typical definitions would indicate) if used grammatically in a general term?

Thank you for your much patience.

Clive · Answer

Hi,

I hesitate to discuss the uses of nouns in such a very theoretical way. I'd just prefer to say that English vocabulary seems to me to be very flexible, and that a very great deal depends on the context.

So, are you saying virtually any word can be used differently (ie. different than typical definitions would indicate) if used grammatically in a general term?

Did I say that? Let's try. horse One horse. Two horses. A horse has four legs. The horse is a noble animal. English people don't like to eat horse.These usages are all fine.

Despite your modesty, you seem to have quitea good understanding of this. Are there any sample sentences that you are not sure of?

Best wishes, Clive

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you for your explanation and invitation to present some more example sentences. I cannot think of them right now but I am sure some will be presented in the future.

Your last example sentence, "English people don't like to eat horse," is what likely to raised some doubt as to its valid usage by some people who are not yet in possession of good knowledge on the subject.

Most people would be more inclined to write "English people don't like to eat horse meat" and that would seem reasonable to most people.

Why 'eat horse' and not 'eat horse meat'? I am sure both are acceptable, but why a person would resort to using an abtract form of noun, which I think is what is being done or has been done depending on how you look at the situation?

Clive · Answer

Hi,

Why 'eat horse' and not 'eat horse meat'? I am sure both are acceptable, but why a person would resort to using an abtract form of noun, which I think is what is being done or has been done depending on how you look at the situation?

I can't really answer such questions, other than to say that that is just how we like to say it.

It's rather similar to saying 'I had chicken for dinner'. We don't say 'I had chicken meat for dinner'. I think perhaps it is related to the fact that we often don't like to state what is obvious. If I say 'I ate chicken', the listener knows that I mean the meat and not, for example, the feathers.

Clive

base for this usage

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions