0
Jackson6612 Posted 17 years ago
Grammar

Slumdog millionaire

I believe in the expressions cannibal holocaust and stoneman murders, cannibal and stoneman serve the function of adjectives and that's the reason they are not written in plural here. Am I correct? And would you describe them compund nouns?

I found the expression slumdog millionaire awkward (as I have found the movie - one of the most overrated movie of recent past). I think that slumdog is used as an adjective because millionaire can only function as a noun, therefore it can only be slumdog which is modifying the noun. Does it make any sense?
  

Top answer

Help, please.

  • Help, please.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

3 Answers
0
.
I am not familiar with cannibal holocaust or stoneman murders, but your statement is generally correct about nouns-as-adjectives being cast in the singular, and it is the same for Slumdog Millionaire. Millionaire too can function as an adjective of course in other contexts: my millionaire grandfather.
.
0
Hi Mr Micawber

It's nice to hear from you. I thought you were on some kind of vacation. Cannibal holocaust is a worth watching movie but caution should be taken because it contains material which can be VERY disturbing to many individuals. Stoneman murders was a movie made on the series of murders which took place in India in 1980's.

 Thank you very much for the help.

Related Questions