0
Anonymous Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
In which pudding is there chocolate?
In which pudding is there chocolate?
a. The pudding tastes like chocolate.
b. The pudding tastes of chocolate.
a. The pudding tastes like chocolate.
b. The pudding tastes of chocolate.
Top answer
Anonymous In which pudding is there chocolate? a. The pudding tastes like chocolate.
- Anonymous In which pudding is there chocolate?
- a.
- The pudding tastes like chocolate.
- b.
- The pudding tastes of chocolate.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
AnonymousIn which pudding is there chocolate?Both are common, but I hear 'like' more often.
a. The pudding tastes like chocolate.
b. The pudding tastes of chocolate.
00
I agree with Philip,but if you have to come up with one answer, I'd say b., The pudding tastes of chocolate.
If you say something is LIKE something else, then it's NOT it, but LIKE it. So chocolate probably isn't in the pudding that tastes LIKE chocolate.
However, if the pudding tastes OF chocolate, then it's chocolate that one tastes in the pudding, not something like chocolate.
If you say something is LIKE something else, then it's NOT it, but LIKE it. So chocolate probably isn't in the pudding that tastes LIKE chocolate.
However, if the pudding tastes OF chocolate, then it's chocolate that one tastes in the pudding, not something like chocolate.
00
Taste is very subjective. Neither pudding necessarily contains any chocolate whatsoever.
CJ
CJ
00
I believe the questioner has already read [url=htpp://www.englang.ed.ac.uk/people/evidentials.pdf ]this linguistic article[/url]. It says:
A final criterion is that different PP predicative complements drive different kinds of interpretation. A predicative LIKE PP drives an epistemic interpretation, as (12a) shows. A predicative OF clause is not epistemic, it is pure
A final criterion is that different PP predicative complements drive different kinds of interpretation. A predicative LIKE PP drives an epistemic interpretation, as (12a) shows. A predicative OF clause is not epistemic, it is pure
00
Interesting. It seems the author is saying that when I say the pudding tastes of chocolate, I am saying that I can taste in it the chocolate which I know to be in it.
Sadly, when I say the pudding tastes of chocolate, I am saying that I taste something in it that may be chocolate or something like chocolate. I am saying that I taste the taste of chocolate, regardless of th
Sadly, when I say the pudding tastes of chocolate, I am saying that I taste something in it that may be chocolate or something like chocolate. I am saying that I taste the taste of chocolate, regardless of th
00
The "of" version says that there is chocolate and not the "like" version.
00
The questioner has not read that article. The questioner was given the problem by his teacher. Thanks for the source though. Do you agree with the conclusion in it?
00
<Interesting. It seems the author is saying that when I say the pudding tastes of chocolate, I am saying that I can taste in it the chocolate which I know to be in it.>
Note that the author's statement is modal (must) and not categorical.
Note that the author's statement is modal (must) and not categorical.
00
0
You need to go to the link and find "chocolate must be part of the pudding".
0
Related Questions