Proper nouns --- retry

I got one reply to my original post from Mister Micawber, but no reply to my second post.
So here is the discussion so far. (Is there a better way to bring a thread back for further discussion?)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Proper nouns
Posted: 11-28-2004 11:34 PM

Definitions of 'proper noun' describe it as a noun designating a particular being or thing.

But that is not enough, because in "I am riding my bike.", 'my bike' is a particular bike.

So the definitions add that a proper noun does not take a limiting modifier (such as 'my', 'this', 'a', 'an', ...).

Does anyone know of a satisfactory definition of 'proper noun' that does not resort to the limiting- modifier exclusion?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mister Micawber is not online. Last active: 30/11/2004 17:57:28 Mister Micawber
ca.geocities.com
Proficient speaker of English
Forum Moderator
Status: Advanced
Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Total Posts: 1474
Report this post


Re: Proper nouns
Posted: 11-29-2004 03:53 AM

The modifier is not part of the noun. A proper noun is limited to the proper name of any individual person, place or thing. It is considered a noun phrase in itself (Eiffel Tower). Whether it is preceded by a determiner (the Eiffel Tower-- the real one-- or my Eiffel Tower-- the toy one) is irrelevant.

There is no reason not to accept the limiting-modifier exclusion any more than you would not accept the fact that a proper noun is not a verb. 'Bike' is not a proper noun.



This post represents the enlightened but personal opinion of a university-educated, Canadian-American native English speaker.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rvw is online. Last active: 30/11/2004 19:40:50 rvw
Status: New User
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Total Posts: 2
Report this post


Re: Proper nouns
Posted: 11-29-2004 09:25 PM

I don't think the use of limiting adjectives IS irrelevant.

Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines 'proper noun' : " a noun that designates a particular being or thing, does not take a limiting modifier, and is usu. capitalized in English."

The American Heritage Dictionary: "a noun designating by name a being or thing without a limiting modifier."

Perhaps the dictionaries are saying that a proper noun sufficiently specifies a particular being or thing so that a limiting adjective is not needed to identify the being or thing intended. Saying 'my', or 'this' or 'some', or 'a' Eiffel Tower is redundant or confusing because there is only one. (In your example 'my (toy) Eiffel Tower', there are several toy Eiffel Towers, so here it is a common noun.)

The remarks in the definitions of 'proper noun' about limiting adjectives may just be usage comments and not essential to the definitions. But, as worded, the remarks seem to be integral to the definitions.

I still have two questions:

1. Is there a better definition of 'proper noun', one which does not refer to limiting adjectives and which better communicates the specifying action of a proper noun?

2. The prohibition against using limiting adjectives with proper nouns seems to need some qualifying: her (France's) Eiffel Tower. And what about 'the'? The Eiffel Tower, The United States, ... .