Would you not say "an ill man"?

Question

Hi, this is my virgin post.I need your opinions on usages of a couple of words.  I picked these up in an English language forum and could not figure out by myself. &gt;The word "ill":In American English, you do not say "an ill person" but "a sick person" as explained in an unabridged dictionary.  However, descriptions of bad happenings or behaviors such as "ill fate, ill manners, ill weather" are widely used.  I understand the meaning of "ill" as in "ill man" is different from that of "ill fate".  Anyway, would English-speaking natives not say "an ill man or ill patient"?&gt;The word "pale":Here is another word which was claimed to be not placeable as a modifier in front of nouns such as "boy" and "man" or any other humans.   Hence, you do not say "a pale boy" or "pale men", while "pale eyes" or "pale complexions" are OK.  I think it otherwise and the word can be used in any situation.  It there any rules?I really appreciate any input of yours.

BarbaraPA · Accepted Answer

Hi Jazzmaster, and welcome to English Forums. Glad to have you aboard.

I would not say "He's an ill man." I would say "He's a man who is very ill." (When you say "he's a sick man" it can have a different sense -- sick as in "mentally twisted," not simply "unwell.")

With pale, you're right. I would say "That man is very pale. Do you think he's okay?" but would not say "Look at that pale man!" I honestly have not given thought before to adjectives that cannot come before (whole) humans, but can come before parts of us.

Jazzmaster · Answer

Grammar GeekHi Jazzmaster, and welcome to English Forums. Glad to have you aboard.

I would not say "He's an ill man." I would say "He's a man who is very ill." (When you say "he's a sick man" it can have a different sense -- sick as in "mentally twisted," not simply "unwell.")

With pale, you're right. I would say "That man is very pale. Do you think he's okay?" but would not say "Look at that pale man!" I honestly have not given thought before to adjectives that cannot come before (whole) humans, but can come before parts of us.

Thanks for your swift reply, GG. You are the first.

First of all, let me ask you something. Is this forum suitable for questions like these? If not please tell me now. Yet these are questions that some advanced ESL students come up with, as you would know.

Assuming it is all right ...

Yes, I understand you indeed would not say "He's an ill man." as explained in some dictionaries. But why though? This BBC Online news headline says "Ill patient 'controls' treatment" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/6999719.stm This usage is OK because it is a news headline?

My wildest guess is they used to say "an ill perosn", but it was somehow morally forbitten because it also referred to "deeply mental problem". In any case if "a sick person" is the proper way to describe a unhealthy state of a person and it is just customary, I can take it without any problem. I am just wondering if there is a reason for that not being spoken.

With "pale", I did not see any limition in usages whatsoever in dictionaries. If you google "pale men" or "pale girl", you will see a number of instances where the word is written as a modifier in front of a "human" noun. For instance, in this novel written by Ivan Turgenev, published by the Harvard Classics Shelf of Fiction in 1917 "A House of Gentlefolk", there is a passage that goes "chubby child she has turned into a weak-chested, pale girl". http://www.bartleby.com/319/1/46.html

Therefore I have more liberal feeling about "pale" than "ill".

Thanks for your input.

Khoff · Answer

Hi Jazzmaster -- yes, your questions are entirely appropriate and welcome here.

I also have a more liberal feeling about "pale" than "ill." I would probably say "That girl is very pale," but if I read "the pale girl" it would not bother me. On the other hand, "the ill man" sounds very odd. And, while I agree with Grammar Geek that sometimes "He's a sick man" can mean "he is perverse or mentally unbalanced," I think it depends on context, tone of voice, etc. I don't think it would be unusual to say, "He's a sick man" referring simply to one's physical condition.

As to why "an ill man" doesn't "sound right" -- I can't really say. A British speaker might see it differently -- they distinguish between "ill" (in general) and "sick" (nauseated or vomiting) in a way that Americans don't. Personally I very rarely use the word "ill," I think it's less commonly used in the U.S. than in Britain.

Jazzmaster · Answer

khoffHi Jazzmaster -- yes, your questions are entirely appropriate and welcome here.

I also have a more liberal feeling about "pale" than "ill." I would probably say "That girl is very pale," but if I read "the pale girl" it would not bother me. On the other hand, "the ill man" sounds very odd. And, while I agree with Grammar Geek that sometimes "He's a sick man" can mean "he is perverse or mentally unbalanced," I think it depends on context, tone of voice, etc. I don't think it would be unusual to say, "He's a sick man" referring simply to one's physical condition.

As to why "an ill man" doesn't "sound right" -- I can't really say. A British speaker might see it differently -- they distinguish between "ill" (in general) and "sick" (nauseated or vomiting) in a way that Americans don't. Personally I very rarely use the word "ill," I think it's less commonly used in the U.S. than in Britain.

Hello, khoff:
Thanks for your posting.

For a certain reason and what not, I wanted to make sure my hardcore grammatical questions are appropriate here first of all. Can I even mention SVOC here or is it not a good idea?

>>I would probably say "That girl is very pale," but if I read "the pale girl" it would not bother me.
>khoff, you have no idea how much this statement means to me. At least the expression "pale girl" could be acceptable if it is in print. Thank you. You know, the whole thing is that putting "pale" in front of any parts of human, such as eyes, lips and complexion works just fine, but in front of the human his/herself does not is hard to digest.

>>On the other hand, "the ill man" sounds very odd.
>This naturally leads to my next question where it gets pretty "ill". So please don't turn "pale" !
What if you see "the terminally ill man" or "the critically ill patient"? Adverbs such as terminally or critically, medically will some how make it all right for "ill" to be placed in front of "man", do they not? This is the very point I wanted to know. Without an adverb: the ill man(X), with an adverb: the terminally ill man (OK). ... Finally here is the core question: why is this?

Please do not feel obligated to answer this. I do not think I can answer this myself.

Thanks for your inputs.

Feebs11 · Answer

What is wrong with saying the ill man, any more than saying the dead man, the living man, the angry man or the sick man? I think you are making too much of this by asking "why is this" - it just is.

Khoff · Answer

jazzmasterCan I even mention SVOC here or is it not a good idea?

Sure -- we can talk about SemiVolatile Organic Compounds -- why not? (I assume you mean something else by SVOC, but I'm afraid I don't know what it is -- sorry. If it's a linguistics term, feel free to bring it up in the Linguistics sub-forum.)

I would agree that "the terminally ill man" sounds okay but "the ill man" does not, and I can't explain why, but I think it's a very interesting question. It may be based solely on the sound of "ill" and not the sense -- "the ill man" sounds to me as though it's going to be "the ill-mannered ..." "Ill" sounds so much like a prefix, it doesn't seem "strong" enough to hold this position in the sentence. (This purely is a guess -- utterly subjective, and not at all authoritative!)

I like your questions, jazzmaster!

Jazzmaster · Answer

Feebs11 What is wrong with saying the ill man, any more than saying the dead man, the living man, the angry man or the sick man? I think you are making too much of this by asking "why is this" - it just is.

Thanks for your post:
That was exactly what I thought ... until I was presented with this:

"ill & sick"

— In the U.S. the two words are used practically interchangeably except that sick is always used when the word modifies the following noun: He looks sick (ill); a sick person.

— In England, sick is not interchangeable with ill, but usually has the connotation of nauseous: She got sick and threw up. Sick, however, is used before nouns just as in the U.S.: a sick man.

Direct excerpt form:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

,,, my understanding of these lines from the dictionary is "you do not say 'the ill man or ill anyone"".
If this was just a little customary way of treating the mere word "ill" in the US, you can say I am making too much of this by asking "why is this?".
This however is true in your country as well as you see. That is why I am making a BIG FUSS about this issue. Get it?

Let me ask you this, would you say "the killed man" as well, or do you say "the man killed"?

Khoff · Answer

Jazzmaster -- you might be interested in reading an old thread about adjectives in the attributive position (the fat cat) and the predicative position (the cat is fat) (I can never remember the terms!) Attributive Adjective. (Read the whole thread; some of the opinions posted are wrong.) I especially like the anonymous post that included this explanation:

Most adjectives can be both attributive and predicative, but a very few of them are only one or the other.
For example, exlusively attributive adjectives include:
entire ("The entire school was present." is OK. "The school was entire." is not OK.)
outright ("That's outright nonsense." is OK. "That nonsense is outright". is not OK.)
utter ("What an utter shambles!" is OK. "This shambles is utter!" is not OK.)

Exclusively predicative adjectives include:
aghast ("Her parents were aghast." is OK. "Her aghast parents were speechless" is not OK.)
alive ("Is that snake alive?" is OK. "Is that an alive snake?" is not OK.)

One specific example I want to point out is "late," which has different meanings in the two positions -- "My late father" means my father is dead, while "my father is late" just means that he is not on time. I wonder if there are others that change meaning according to their position in the sentence? Anyone have any to contribute?

Jazzmaster · Answer

khoffSure -- we can talk about SemiVolatile Organic Compounds -- why not? (I assume you mean something else by SVOC, but I'm afraid I don't know what it is -- sorry. If it's a linguistics term, feel free to bring it up in the Linguistics sub-forum.)

I would agree that "the terminally ill man" sounds okay but "the ill man" does not, and I can't explain why, but I think it's a very interesting question. It may be based solely on the sound of "ill" and not the sense -- "the ill man" sounds to me as though it's going to be "the ill-mannered ..." "Ill" sounds so much like a prefix, it doesn't seem "strong" enough to hold this position in the sentence. (This purely is a guess -- utterly subjective, and not at all authoritative!)

I like your questions, jazzmaster!

khoff, thanks!

By SVOC I mean Supreme Vanilla-Oreo Coffee. Is there anything else that stands for SVOC in this world?
lol ... actually I found it is OK to use that term here by myself. Go ahead and search the term "SVOC" on the top of this page. You will see what I am talking about.
But do not feel bad if you did not know what it is. Unless you are a Japanese or Korean high school student, you are not supposed to know that.

>>(the fat cat) and (the cat is fat)
>Welcome to the club. I cannot even spell Micheal or Michael.

Thanks for links. That's what I call "hardcore grammar".

>>I wonder if there are others that change meaning according to their position in the sentence? Anyone have any to contribute?
>I am glad you came up with "late" example. That is an obvious one. Well, indeed "ill" is another example:

A. She has been critically ill for the last few weeks. (sick from disease)
B. Their ill deeds were finally brought to justice. (bad doings)

As you mentioned, "alive" is another interesting word. If an adjective starts with "a", such as alive, alone, asleep (oh yes, I am so sure they have a nice name for these words too), it is ALWAYS predicative.

Thanks for your inputs.

Would you not say "an ill man"?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions