0
English 1b3 Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Conjunction--Than
'Than' is a subordinating conjunction. As such, it joins a main clause to a dependent clause. Some of the words in the clause that follow 'than' are often omitted in speech and writing, making 'than' appear to be joining a clause to a single word or phrase:
You are more likely to train harder with a trainer than without.
This suggests that there were more people at the meeting than might have been expected.
I would rather play a game of tennis than listen to you.
Do you consider your needs to be more important than the needs of others.
--------------
Since 'than' technically must join two clauses, shouldn't these sentences above have an original form, showing 'than' joining two clauses? EG
It's so much easier for us to get jobs than them. = Idiomatic, grammatical, reduced version
It's so much easier for us to get jobs than it is easy for them to get jobs. = Original, unidiomatic version
Thank you
You are more likely to train harder with a trainer than without.
This suggests that there were more people at the meeting than might have been expected.
I would rather play a game of tennis than listen to you.
Do you consider your needs to be more important than the needs of others.
--------------
Since 'than' technically must join two clauses, shouldn't these sentences above have an original form, showing 'than' joining two clauses? EG
It's so much easier for us to get jobs than them. = Idiomatic, grammatical, reduced version
It's so much easier for us to get jobs than it is easy for them to get jobs. = Original, unidiomatic version
Thank you
Top answer
, "them" in your example sentence), rather than repeating a nearly-identical phrase. I think if you used the "original sentence" you are talking about, people would get lost in what you are talking about, because that structure is so uncommon in English. I like your linguist thinking though...
- , "them" in your example sentence), rather than repeating a nearly-identical phrase.
- I think if you used the "original sentence" you are talking about, people would get lost in what you are talking about, because that structure is so uncommon in English.
- I like your linguist thinking though...
- :-)
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
7 Answers
0
I'd say that the reduced version exists for a reason; it is more efficient to express that kind of redundant dependent clause using a single contrastive word (e.g., "them" in your example sentence), rather than repeating a nearly-identical phrase.
I think if you used the "original sentence" you are talking about, people would get lost in what you are talking about, because that structu
I think if you used the "original sentence" you are talking about, people would get lost in what you are talking about, because that structu
00
English 1b3shouldn't these sentences above have an original form, showing 'than' joining two clauses?I suppose you could say that they have 'an original form'. Yes.
I can see that your example illustrates your point.
CJ
00
CalifJimI suppose you could say that they have 'an original form'. Yes.I couldn't think of the 'original' or non-reduced forms for the the other sentences, so I was unsure whether or not my claim was right. If you can figure out the 'originals,' that would help me.
More to the point, are we just meant to familarize ourselves with each and every diff
00
This suggests that there were more people at the meeting than there might have been many people at the meeting.
You are more likely to train harder with a trainer than you are likely to train harder without a trainer.
I would rather play a game of tennis than I would gladly listen to you.
Do you consider your needs to be more important than you do consider the needs
You are more likely to train harder with a trainer than you are likely to train harder without a trainer.
I would rather play a game of tennis than I would gladly listen to you.
Do you consider your needs to be more important than you do consider the needs
00
I'm not even going to attempt to formulate a rule that unfailingly gives the unreduced form for comparatives. I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader. I'll just mention that I think all such constructions imply that the amount of one thing is greater or smaller than the amount of another, and that the unreduced form must be something that makes that difference in amounts clear. The sort o
00
Than you both, CJ and Anon, for your replies. Very logical way to think about it, CJ.
So just to sum-up, do you agree
So just to sum-up, do you agree
- that 'than' is a subordinating conjunction?
- that is joins a main clause to a dependent clause, either implicitly or explicitly?
- that the 'non-reduced' forms may not exist or be completely comprehensible?
00
Also, are both variations of the use of 'than' correct here?
I have more influence over the movie than you.
I have more influence than you over the movie.
And should we call 'than' a preposition perhaps when a noun follows it and when there seems to be no chance of it ever being a clause before the omission of words?
I have more influence over the movie than you.
I have more influence than you over the movie.
And should we call 'than' a preposition perhaps when a noun follows it and when there seems to be no chance of it ever being a clause before the omission of words?
0
Related Questions