substitution or truncation?

Question

Which hypothesis is reasonable? H1 sees it as "substitution of 'that' for 'of the population'", while H2 sees it as "truncation of 'of'".

H1:

This is a tricky one. Even if what you suggest is correct, it is still long and a bit awkward: that replaces what I have underlined, precisely.

The population of San Francisco is less than one tenth of the population of Tokyo.

It becomes:

The population of San Francisco is less than one tenth that of Tokyo.

H2:

I disagree with the idea that "that" can replace "of NOUN."
I'd see it as truncation of "of" due to its proximity with the next "of."

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

To me, if I understand your original sentence and your question correctly, that = the population:

The population of San Francisco is less than one tenth of the population of Tokyo = The population of San Francisco is less than one tenth (of) that of Tokyo.

Does that make me H3?

Teleostomi · Answer

That makes you H1, I guess!

What bird do you like?

CalifJim · Answer

H1 is literally true. The string of characters of the population has really been replaced by the string of characters that in the second sentence. In that strict and mindless sense of "replace" H1 is true.
This is probably not the meaning of "replace" that was of interest to the person who asked the question, so the answer, though literally true, cannot be considered particularly useful.

The first statement of H2 is literally true. that cannot replace an of phrase (grammatically).
I don't agree with the second part of H2. I believe of has been deleted, yes, but I do not believe that proximity with another of has anything to do with it.

H3: Between a fraction and the noun that goes with it, of is optional (and frequently omitted). This is to be expected from the behavior of all: all of my clothes / all my clothes.

Your car is one-third of the size of my car. / one-third the size
The amount of money in this box is two-fifths of the amount of money in that box. / two-fifths the amount
Half of the sugar is missing. / Half the sugar
____

So one-tenth of the population of Tokyo becomes one-tenth that of Tokyo through two transformations (performed in either order):
the population is replaced by that
the optional of after a fraction is deleted.

CJ

Teleostomi · Answer

Wow, you should publish a book or two!

It's interesting to me, that as well as "a fraction," and "all," the demonstrative pronoun "that" can be used just the same way!

What about other demonstrative pronouns, then? I'm sure 3 is perfectly OK, but why we never see 1 and 2? How could it be explained grammatically?

1 one-tenth this of Tokyo

2 one-tenth these of Tokyo

3 one-tenth those of Tokyo

CalifJim · Answer

as well as "a fraction," and "all," the demonstrative pronoun "that" can be used just the same way!

I think you have misunderstood.
The of after a fraction or after "all" is optional. There is no parallel construction where the of after "that" is also optional.

one-tenth of the population or one-tenth the population. Either is possible.
all of the eggs or all the eggs. Either is possible.
that of Japan is possible. that Japan is not possible.

this and these cannot be used as you suggest. Only that and those can be used that way, to substitute for a singular or plural noun, respectively. There is no logical reason. It is an arbitrary matter of usage that developed historically.

the satellites of Saturn and those of Jupiter = the satellites of Saturn and the satellites of Jupiter
the bravery of the generals and that of the lieutenants = the bravery of the generals and the bravery of the lieutenants
the people of Iraq and those of Iran = the people of Iraq and the people of Iran

CJ

Teleostomi · Answer

the people of Iraq andthose of Iran = the people of Iraq and the people of Iran

Can we use "that" instead?

CalifJim · Answer

No. people (as I used it here, and as it is used 99.83% of the time) is plural. It requires a different context to use people as a singular, typically a people, which is indefinite, and neither that nor those is possible as a substitute for an indefinite. Use the pronoun one or another instead. [Recall that asterisked items are ungrammatical.]

*a package of raisins and that of walnuts
a package of raisins and one/another of walnuts
(the package of raisins and that of walnuts)
*a people of great bravery and that of great genius
a people of great bravery and one/another of great genius [possible, but strange]
*!!!the people of great bravery and that of great genius

CJ

Teleostomi · Answer

You're a grammar king!
You can teach! You can jive! Dig in the grammar king!

substitution or truncation?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions