"The ugly small round old blue ..."

Question

Consider:"The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag"Is the order correct?We believe so as it follows:determiner, observation, size, shape, age, color, origin, material, noun-qualifier, noun(religion was left out cos most bags are non-believers!)However, we're tempted to think "small AND round"Any thoughts?Should there be any commas in there?Or not, as they are all cumulative adjectives?Aren't they?If we add "inexpensive" to the phrase should it be "commered" with ugly?: "The ugly, inexpensive (AND) small ..."?(2 coordinate adjectives, aren't they?)This may not seem like a REAL phrase but it IS a real exercise that we were given and that is causing much heated discussion.Any feedback very welcomeBTW, if anyone knows of a place on the WWW that explains how to identify coordinate adjectives other than using the "do they SOUND right when inverted" criterion - please let us know - "SOUNDS right" isn't much help for people who are trying to learn English :-(Cleuman & Co.TEFL Course SufferersBrasil

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Consider: "The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag" Is the order correct? We believe so as it ... to the phrase should it be "commered" with ugly?: "The ugly, inexpensive (AND) small ..."? (2 coordinate adjectives, aren't they?)[/nq]
I've got no authority to offer on this except my own native idiom, but I'd use commas between everything prior to "plastic", and if I wanted to add "inexpensive", it would go between "blue" and "French".

The ugly, small, round, old, blue, inexpensive, French, plastic shopping bag.
(Your workbook or teacher may well disagree with me in which case, they're right but that's my off-the-cuff reaction..)

Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Consider: "The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag" Is the order correct?[/nq]
I would not put "old" so far down the list. "Ugly old" is quite standard.
[nq:1]We believe so as it follows: determiner, observation, size, shape, age, color, origin, material, noun-qualifier, noun[/nq]
You do realize that native speakers practically never make such long lists, right? These instructions have been strung together so they will cover all possible cases with a single rule, but the real examples themselves have only three, maybe four or five adjectives.

More than that, we put separately:
Give me that ugly old blue plastic shopping bag the small, round one we got in France.
[nq:1](religion was left out cos most bags are non-believers!) However, we're tempted to think "small AND round" Any thoughts? Should there be any commas in there? Or not, as they are all cumulative adjectives? Aren't they?[/nq]
Since it's not a natural construction, I can't get too excited about what you call it or how you punctuate it.
[nq:1]If we add "inexpensive" to the phrase should it be "commered" with ugly?: "The ugly, inexpensive (AND) small ..."? (2 ... it IS a real exercise that we were given and that is causing much heated discussion. Any feedback very welcome[/nq]
Just for comparison, the English adjective order that two non-native a.u.e participants have told that they were taught:
1) Size - age - shape - color - origin - material - purpose - / noun /
2) Determiners-epithet-size-shape-age-color-participle-origin-substance-gerund or noun or denominal adj.
[nq:1]BTW, if anyone knows of a place on the WWW that explains how to identify coordinate adjectives other than using ... - please let us know - "SOUNDS right" isn't much help for people who are trying to learn English :-([/nq]
I know, that's true for anyone trying to learn another language, and I sympathize. But, honest to ***, English speakers just put the words together so that they "sound right," we do not classify them and learn rules. Not consciously.

Best wishes Donna Richoux

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Consider: "The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag"[/nq]
I know, I know - never use THAT many adjectives!
Tell that to the instructor who gave it to us as group task for discussion and result presentation!
'E ain't real, man! Obviously a ****** in a previous incarnation!
[nq:2]Is the order correct?[/nq]
[nq:1]Just for comparison, the English adjective order that two non-native a.u.e participants have told that they were taught: 1) Size - age - shape - color - origin - material - purpose - / noun / 2) Determiners-epithet-size-shape-age-color-participle-origin-substance- gerund or noun or denominal adj.[/nq]
Please, what is "participle" in 2) above?
We found THOSE orders on the WWW plus this one:
3) size - age - opinion - color - material - origin - purpose - noun

which is basically the same as 1) except that it includes "opinion (epithet)" - strangely AFTER "size/shape" - , excludes "shape" and reverses "origin" with "material"
"A wooden Egyptian box" or "an Egyptian wooden box"?

The difference between 1) and 2) is given in:
"A square new box" or "a new square box"
Strangely ALL the different references on WWW that we found state:

... size - age - shape - ... "a new square box"
with the exception of 2 sources (1 being "The Royal Order of Adjectives" by Darling) which state:
... size - shape - age ... "a square new box"
The class instructor (NOT a native speaker and a "Darling" man) says that it's "square new" however almost the entire class votes for "new square". Our vote was based on a Google search that brought up zero hits for "square new box" and 25 hits for "new square box" and the fact that the Darling "square old box" did not sound as good as "old square box".
BTW, after much haggling we put "religion" between "origin" and "material":
"white american christian woman" not "white christian american woman"

Now we are trying to put "condition" (broken, working, fresh, rotten) in its place - some say that these adjectives should go in the "description/opinion/observation/epithet" class but the majority of the group disagree as it appears that this class is for subjective, not objective, adjectives - and there is nothing subjective about something that is broken!
... if only we had been born under a nice big red, white and blue flag ... we wouldn't have this annoying, soul-destoying, enormous problem with troublesome, time-consuming adjectival sequencing of the beautiful, complicated old English language.
OR
... we wouldn't have this annoying, soul-destroying and enormous problem with troublesome and time-consuming adjectival sequencing of the beautiful but complicated old English language. OR
...
Comments on the above points would be welcomed by the study group.

TIA

Cleuman & Co.
Brasil

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I know, I know - never use THAT many adjectives! Tell that to the instructor who gave it to us as group task for discussion and result presentation! 'E ain't real, man! Obviously a ****** in a previous incarnation![/nq]
[nq:2]Just for comparison, the English adjective order that two non-native ... noun / 2) Determiners-epithet-size-shape-age-color-participle-origin-substance- gerund or noun or denominal adj.[/nq]
[nq:1]Please, what is "participle" in 2) above?[/nq]
Well, these aren't my rules, you understand, so I can't vouch for how well they work but I imagine the creator was thinking of adjectives that are formed in the manner of past participles, like "painted" and "burned," or present participles, like "blinking."
[nq:1]We found THOSE orders on the WWW plus this one: 3) size - age - opinion - color - material ... AFTER "size/shape" - , excludes "shape" and reverses "origin" with "material" "A wooden Egyptian box" or "an Egyptian wooden box"?[/nq]
I can imagine saying either. Surely some of this has to do with the circumstances, with emphasis, with the reasons behind the speech. I think these rules were meant to be guidelines not something carved in stone.
We do say "blind old man" and "old blind man" nearly equally:

"blind old man" 2340
"old blind man" 3210
If you absolutely must master this to pass an examination, I suggest you learn the teacher's way, or the textbook's way, and then forget about it. You will have learned enough about sentence construction to get along without embarrassment.
[nq:1]The difference between 1) and 2) is given in: "A square new box" or "a new square box" Strangely ALL ... square box" and the fact that the Darling "square old box" did not sound as good as "old square box".[/nq]
There might be regional differences to these things, too, British vs. US, or changes over time.
[nq:1]BTW, after much haggling we put "religion" between "origin" and "material": "white american christian woman" not "white christian american woman"[/nq]
Please capitalize American and Christian. Yes, I think the first is a little more likely, but I think you can get away with either. So could you with "a Christian woman, white, American..." and so on.
[nq:1]Now we are trying to put "condition" (broken, working, fresh, rotten) in its place - some say that these adjectives ... we wouldn't have this annoying, soul-destoying, enormous problem with troublesome, time-consuming adjectival sequencing of the beautiful, complicated old English language.[/nq]
But if you were learning ANY language, you'd have problems like this. Different problems, but problems.
[nq:1]OR ... we wouldn't have this annoying, soul-destroying and enormous problem with troublesome and time-consuming adjectival sequencing of the beautiful but complicated old English language.[/nq]
Either will do. I like the "but" in the last line.

Best Donna Richoux

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Consider: "The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag"[/nq]
I'd agree with all the general comments about this given by others already. This British native speaker would probably vary the order to: "The ugly old French small round blue plastic shopping bag"

I can't explain the reasons definitively; "ugly old" seems to go naturally together; "shopping bag" must go together because "shopping" here has become part of the noun rather than an adjective, and "blue plastic" wants to nestle close up against it. I put "French" earlier in the sequence because it is probably intended to be highly discriminatory.
Matti

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I know, I know - never use THAT many adjectives![/nq]
I'd say "The ugly old French round blue plastic shopping bag". I think.
[nq:1]"A wooden Egyptian box" or "an Egyptian wooden box"?[/nq]
"An E. w." normally; but "A w. E." if an "Egyptian box" is a specific kind of box. Think of "A pink French letter".
[nq:1]The difference between 1) and 2) is given in: "A square new box" or "a new square box"[/nq]
Again, "a n. s." in general; but if the age of the box is a given in the context, then "I wanted a square new box, not a round one". I think.
[nq:1]BTW, after much haggling we put "religion" between "origin" and "material": "white american christian woman" not "white christian american woman"[/nq]
Same as above: context can demand variation.
[nq:1]Now we are trying to put "condition" (broken, working, fresh, rotten) in its place - some say that these adjectives ... that this class is for subjective, not objective, adjectives - and there is nothing subjective about something that is broken![/nq]
"A punctured French letter". "A punctured pink French letter". "An old punctured pink French letter". "A horrible old punctured pink French letter". "A horrible old punctured pink rubber French letter". "A horrible old punctured pink English French letter". "A horrible old punctured pink rubber ribbed English French letter". "A horrible old punctured flat pink rubber English French letter".

By the way, serial commas separating adjectives are a contentious area. I dislike them, others insist on them. In the trade you have to go by the house style; but left to myself I tend to treat a comma between adjectives as a suggestion of elliptical "and". There are a few occasions on which you may want to use an "and", since it has a slightly different feeling.
Keep on having fun with the language: we do!
Mike.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Consider: "The ugly small round old blue French plastic shopping bag"[/nq]
[nq:1]I'd agree with all the general comments about this given by others already. This British native speaker would probably vary ... up against it. I put "French" earlier in the sequence because it is probably intended to be highly discriminatory. Matti[/nq]
We have been taught that, in British English, in order to be discriminatory towards the French one simply substitutes the "ench" with "og"
;-)

Cleuman and Co.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Please, what is "participle" in 2) above?[/nq]
[nq:1]Well, these aren't my rules, you understand, so I can't vouch for how well they work but I imagine the creator was thinking of adjectives that are formed in the manner of past participles, like "painted" and "burned," or present participles, like "blinking."[/nq]
My ***! More research work here - more group arguments! Will this never end?
[nq:1]I can imagine saying either. Surely some of this has to do with the circumstances, with emphasis, with the reasons behind the speech. I think these rules were meant to be guidelines not something carved in stone.[/nq]
No? Really?
Joao!
Put your chisel away! - get out your pencil and rubber, er, eraser.
[nq:1]We do say "blind old man" and "old blind man" nearly equally: "blind old man" 2340 "old blind man" 3210[/nq]
"blind old man" - an old man who's gone blind?
"old blind man" - a man, blind since birth, who's now old?

That's our interpretation anyway, where we have set a rule of examining the phrase and deciding, according to the sense, if any of the adjectives need to be 'promoted' to the status of noun-qualifier in order for the phrase to read correctly.
(Here we're looking at rules for writing (see below) so have time to think before putting chisel to stone, so to speak, er write).
[nq:1]If you absolutely must master this to pass an examination, I suggest you learn the teacher's way, or the textbook's way, and then forget about it. You will have learned enough about sentence construction to get along without embarrassment.[/nq]
You're getting tired of our rantings, aren't you?
Can't say I blame you - join the club!
I thought that I had explained, but let me give you the circumstances: We are a research/study group of students in a TEFL course that has been given the task of preparing a 1-hour lesson on "Adjectives". This lesson will be presented as part of our final evalaution exam to a group of already-qualified TEFL teachers/examiners. We are expected to come up with more advanced material than that which was given to us during the course and the level of the lesson is to be what we would call "Masters' Instrumental", that is, material that could be given to non-native English speakers who intend to study for Masters/PhD in English-speaking universities and, as such, will be required to both read and write thesis-level English.
[nq:1]There might be regional differences to these things, too, British vs. US, or changes over time.[/nq]
Aren't there always :-((
[nq:1]Please capitalize American and Christian. Yes, I think the first is a little more likely, but I think you can get away with either. So could you with "a Christian woman, white, American..." and so on.[/nq]
Sorry! Internauters (poetic) and Portuguese-speakers' licence! Examined any of your e-mails lately?
[nq:2]... we wouldn't have this annoying, soul-destroying and enormous problem with troublesome and time-consuming adjectival sequencing of the beautiful but complicated old English language.[/nq]
[nq:1]Either will do. I like the "but" in the last line.[/nq]
Which (the 'but') only goes to show that here we are dealing with two coordinate adjectives! Oh, what fun!
BTW, you should remember that none of us here are native-English speakers so a lot of this is still not 'instintive' to us. Our own latin-based language (Portuguese) has completely different adjective placement rules.
For example, "um grande homem" (a great man) is something completely different to "um homem grande" (a big man) :-((
Thank you kindly for all your assistance on this - the group sends you their best wishes ...
... now, where did I put my chisel?

Cleuman and Co.
Brasil

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I'd agree with all the general comments about this given ... sequence because it is probably intended to be highly discriminatory.[/nq]
[nq:1]We have been taught that, in British English, in order to be discriminatory towards the French one simply substitutes the "ench" with "og" ;-)[/nq]
I understand the smiley, but not a lot else. By the way, you should avoid "substitute A with B" as this doesn't tell us whether A is replacing B or rather being replaced by B.
I hope you're aware that I was not "discriminating against the French", but was pointing out that there's a tendency to bring forward adjectives which are important in identifying the object under discussion; such adjectives "discriminate" highly.
Matti

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]We have been taught that, in British English, in order to be discriminatory towards the French one simply substitutes the "ench" with "og" ;-)[/nq]
[nq:1]I understand the smiley, but not a lot else. By the way, you should avoid "substitute A with B" as this doesn't tell us whether A is replacing B or rather being replaced by B.[/nq]
My apologies - a foreigner's feeble attempt at British language/culture humour.
A replaced by B: "French" ==> "Frog"
[nq:1]I hope you're aware that I was not "discriminating against the French",[/nq]

Oh! So you're not british then! :-)

[nq:1]but was pointing out that there's a tendency to bring forward adjectives which are important in identifying the object under discussion; such adjectives "discriminate" highly.[/nq]
Interesting! Our 'instintive' reaction was exactly the opposite - probably due to our own language's implicit adjective order. In order to "discriminate" (highlight) this aspect of the old bag we would have put it right up against the noun - or the noun-qualifier in this case:
" ... French shopping bag"
We have come up with a rule that we called
"sense-retaining adjective promotion"
This dictates that the pre-determined order changes, if necessary, to maintain the sense.
(If we present a "just do the instintive thing" solution we will lose marks on our exam project - for sure).
So, for example, we have:
"a small green French book"
which can have the colour adjective "sense-retaining promoted" to: "a small French green book"
if we are NOT talking about the companion language book to our blue History book and our red Physics book but rather a green book that was published/printed in France.

Green being the favourite colour of frogs!

You may think that this is overkill but please remember that we have to explain this in objective, not instintive, terms.

Our biggest problem will be trying to explain how to identify coordinate adjectives:
"reverse them and see if it still sounds right"
"put in 'and' or 'but' and see if it still sounds right" -((
Many thanks for your assistance and apologies to the French for the horrible humour.

Cleuman and Co.
Brasil

"The ugly small round old blue ..."

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions