0
Liveinjapan Posted 18 years ago
Grammar

Bilingual

0I'm bilingual.02br
00I'm a bilingual.02br
00I'm a perfect bilingual.02br
00I'm completely bilingual.02br
00I'm perfectly bilingual.02br
02br
00I found all of them on Google. 02br
02br
00But I couldn't find 'I'm a complete bilingual.'02br
02br
00Why?05002br
02br
00Thanks02br
00LiJ010id3
  

Top answer

02br 02br 00are incorrect. 0-

— Nona the brit

  • 02br 02br 00are incorrect.
  • 0-
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

11 Answers
0
0Bilingual is an 01u00adjective02u00 so both02br
02br
00I'm a bilingual.02br
00I'm a perfect bilingual.02br
02br
00are incorrect. So is I''m a complete bilingual'.0-
0
0
0"I'm a perfect bilingual" only has 2 results too, btw.02br
02br
00"I'm a complete bilingual" gives no results because when you are a bilingual, you are a 01b00person 02b00who can use 2 languages. When complete is used as the adjective, it modifies the person, not the ability, so this is the core source of the weirdness and why the expression is not use
0
0
0Thanks, Nona. Got it. I hope to say 'I'm bilingual' in the future.05002br
02br
00Thanks, Mkyol. Your great expression helped me out! 051010id411id2
0
0
0 01blockquote
01cite10nona the brit12cite10Bilingual is an 11u10adjective12u10 so both12br
12br
10I'm a bilingual.12br
10I'm a perfect bilingual.12br
12br
10are incorrect. So is I''m a complete bilingual'.12br
12br
12blockquote
10Hi Nona02
0
0
0Interesting, in the Cambridge Dictionary it has only the adjective form.02br
02br
00I've not ever heard it as a noun either.0-
0
0
1blockquote
00I don't think I have ever 11u10seen12u10 it used that way12blockquote
11blockquote
00I've not ever 11u10heard12u10 it as a noun 11b10either12b12blockquote
10Where does 01i00either02i00 refer in this case? I or heard?02br
0
0
0Websters is more of a descriptive dictionary. Cambridge and Oxford are prescriptive. I think that explains why Webster's has it as a noun. As our language evolves (becomes degraded), the more we'll find things in Websters that aren't widesly accepted by grammarians.0-
0
0
0 01blockquote
01cite10Anonymous12cite10Websters is more of a descriptive dictionary. Cambridge and Oxford are prescriptive. I think that explains why Webster's has it as a noun. As our language evolves (becomes degraded), the more we'll find things in Websters that aren't widesly accepted by grammarians.12br
12blockquote
10
0
0
0Change is only degradation when it comes about from lazy people that don't care to learn the rules. If they know the rules and disagree and change for good reason, it's different.0-
0
0
1blockquote
01cite10Cool Breeze12cite12br
10The funny thing is that most people don't consider past changes bad, only those that happen in their lifetime. I fail to understand the logic behind that reasoning. 12br
12br
12blockquote
10That's a great point! I tend to feel that 01b00some02b00
0

Related Questions