more a vs. more of a

No one, really?!

1 and 2 don't make sense, because when you have the words "more a" or "more of a" in a sentence, you need to complete it with "than...."

3a and b are okay, but 3a sounds better because in b you have three "of's" in a row, which sound repetitious.

Anonymous1 and 2 don't make sense, because when you have the words "more a" or "more of a" in a sentence, you need to complete it with "than...."

Well, just because you have "more a" or "more of a" in a sentence doesn't mean the sentence doesn't make sense without "than...". I mean, lacking "than..." does not automatically render the sentence ungrammatical, do

1 and 2 are grammatical - from a purely theoretical grammatical point of view - but they don't make sense as stand-alone sentences. They are incomplete thoughts without a "than..." phrase to complete them. They would only make sense as part of a specific kind of dialog. For example:

X: Was he more (of) a target or more (of) an elusive will-o-the-wisp?
Y: He was more (of) a target

The ones with "more a" have to have something in them for the first thing to be different than: He was more a diplomat than a soldier. "He was more a diplomat" does not make sense unless there is some contrast understood from context.

The ones with "more of a" mean that he was not so much before. "He was more of a gentleman now that Becky was around."

1-a) He was more a target

Anonymous1 and 2 are grammatical - from a purely theoretical grammatical point of view - but they don't make sense as stand-alone sentences.

All right. Let's put the grammaticality issue aside and focus on the question I had originally intended to ask.
What I wanted to ask, in a nutshell, was (A) why would you put the preposition "of" in the "more of a" co

You can use "more a" and "more of a" interchangeably, and the meaning would be essentially the same. However in certain set expressions like: "He's more of a gentleman now than when he was in college.", it's customary to use "more of a" rather than "more a." You could say, "He's more a gentleman now...", and it would mean essentially the same thing, but
custom dictates "more of a".

AnonymousHowever in certain set expressions like: "He's more of a gentleman now than when he was in college.", it's customary to use "more of a" rather than "more a."

(3-a) He was more a target of ridicule than of respect.
So (3-a) would NOT be the "set expression" where "more of a" is preferred to "more a"?
I mean, how can I notice if it's the

You can use "more a" and "more of a" interchangeably, and the meaning is the same. You can even mix them in the same sentence, for example: "Was he more of a target of ridicule or more an elusive will-o-the-wisp?" or "Was he more a target of ridicule or more of an elusive will-o-the-wisp?" etc. So you don't really have to concern yourself about set expressions. As for recognizing these set e