0
Usenet Posted 22 years ago
English in UK
Comparisons and measuring
Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence?
Thanks, Vanya
This sentence is really elliptical:
"The wall was four feet high."
"High" is an adjective that relates to the subject "wall"; the noun "feet" (and its modifying adjective, "four") are the object of an implied preposition, such as "by" or "to"; as,
"The wall was high (by) four feet."
Makes perfect sense to me. If it makes you feel better, you can substitute an entire phrase, such as "by the height of" instead of "by"; as in,
"The wall was high (by the height of) four feet."
"High" still modifies "wall," and "four feet" is still in the objective case (here the object of "of" instead of "by").
Thanks, Vanya
This sentence is really elliptical:
"The wall was four feet high."
"High" is an adjective that relates to the subject "wall"; the noun "feet" (and its modifying adjective, "four") are the object of an implied preposition, such as "by" or "to"; as,
"The wall was high (by) four feet."
Makes perfect sense to me. If it makes you feel better, you can substitute an entire phrase, such as "by the height of" instead of "by"; as in,
"The wall was high (by the height of) four feet."
"High" still modifies "wall," and "four feet" is still in the objective case (here the object of "of" instead of "by").
Top answer
In article [nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? "[/nq] That's perfectly acceptable and common usage; I'd probably say "The wall was four foot high".
- In article [nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody?
- How would you parse the first sentence?
- "[/nq] That's perfectly acceptable and common usage; I'd probably say "The wall was four foot high".
- [/nq] To a native English speaker, however, it sounds stilted and confusing.
- I'd have to think twice as to what it meant.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
In article
[nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? Thanks, Vanya This sentence is really elliptical: "The wall was four feet high."[/nq]
That's perfectly acceptable and common usage; I'd probably say "The wall was four foot high".
[nq:1]"The wall was high (by) four feet." Makes perfect sense to me.[/nq]
To a native English speaker, h
[nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? Thanks, Vanya This sentence is really elliptical: "The wall was four feet high."[/nq]
That's perfectly acceptable and common usage; I'd probably say "The wall was four foot high".
[nq:1]"The wall was high (by) four feet." Makes perfect sense to me.[/nq]
To a native English speaker, h
00
[nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? Thanks, Vanya This sentence is really ... still modifies "wall," and "four feet" is still in the objective case (here the object of "of" instead of "by").[/nq]
I'd say "the sentence makes sense: what else matters?". While /au fond/ I'm unsympathetic to this sort of ****-retentive analysis, if drawn into it,
I'd say "the sentence makes sense: what else matters?". While /au fond/ I'm unsympathetic to this sort of ****-retentive analysis, if drawn into it,
00
On 6 Feb 2004 21:23:46 GMT, "Adam D. Barratt"
, "Vanya"
I think it is worse than confusing. To me, "The wall was high by four feet" suggests that the wall was four feet higher than it should be.
[nq:2]If it makes you feel better, you can substitute an ... "The wall was high (by the height of) four feet."[/nq]
Same problem as before - see my comment above.
[nq:1]That's
, "Vanya"
I think it is worse than confusing. To me, "The wall was high by four feet" suggests that the wall was four feet higher than it should be.
[nq:2]If it makes you feel better, you can substitute an ... "The wall was high (by the height of) four feet."[/nq]
Same problem as before - see my comment above.
[nq:1]That's
00
In article
[nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? Thanks, Vanya This sentence is really ... noun "feet" (and its modifying adjective, "four") are the object of an implied preposition, such as "by" or "to"; as,[/nq]
I disagree. Yes, "high" is an adjective of "wall", but "four feet" is an adverbial phrase modifying "high", indicating the degr
[nq:1]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you parse the first sentence? Thanks, Vanya This sentence is really ... noun "feet" (and its modifying adjective, "four") are the object of an implied preposition, such as "by" or "to"; as,[/nq]
I disagree. Yes, "high" is an adjective of "wall", but "four feet" is an adverbial phrase modifying "high", indicating the degr
00
...
[nq:2]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you ... objective case (here the object of "of" instead of "by").[/nq]
[nq:1]I'd say "the sentence makes sense: what else matters?". While /au fond/ I'm unsympathetic to this sort of ****-retentive analysis, if drawn into it, I'd be very tempted to parse "four feet high" as an adjectival phrase whose internal structure isn't wor
[nq:2]Does this argument make sense to anybody? How would you ... objective case (here the object of "of" instead of "by").[/nq]
[nq:1]I'd say "the sentence makes sense: what else matters?". While /au fond/ I'm unsympathetic to this sort of ****-retentive analysis, if drawn into it, I'd be very tempted to parse "four feet high" as an adjectival phrase whose internal structure isn't wor
00
[nq:2]That's even worse. :-) If you /really/ wanted to rearrange the sentence, "The height of the wall was four feet" would be far more natural.[/nq]
[nq:1]Natural and unambiguous.[/nq]
Sometimes, ambiguity is intentional. I was at a pub quiz last week, in which one of the questions was "What is ten feet high and eighteen inches in diameter?". All the teams had it in mind that they
[nq:1]Natural and unambiguous.[/nq]
Sometimes, ambiguity is intentional. I was at a pub quiz last week, in which one of the questions was "What is ten feet high and eighteen inches in diameter?". All the teams had it in mind that they
0
Related Questions