LISTSERV - ATEG Archives - LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Craig Hancock wrote:

>    Here's a functional observation to balance out the technical views.
>   If we compare two things, we have to know how we are comparing them,
>either explicitly or implicitly.  If I say "The day is longer than a
>hot dog," it's confusing because 'day" is a time reference and "hot
>dog" is spatial (in the way we understand length in relation to it.) If
>the comparison is naturally parallel ("The day was longer than a
>sociology lecture"), the reader/listener adds the missing information
>quite easily, so easily in fact that the clause like nature of the
>meaning (comparison) is not fully conscious. (The time dragged. It was
>boring.)
>
>   He's a bigger fool than the president (very clear) >
>   He's a bigger fool than a corkscrew (not so clear)
>   He's more foolish than a corkscrew is twisted (very clear)
>   He's more angry than an SUV driver (not so clear)
>   He's more angry than an SUV driver at a gas pump (very clear)
>
>   The technical classification seems to come into play with prescriptive
>grammarians who want to limit how we use "like" and "as" and so on.
>When we see comparatives, we naturally add information to complete the
>meaning.  This is true, certainly, of pretty much any statement: it
>can't happen without the participation of the reader/listener.  It may
>seem like a side issue, but that's the kind of attention that seems
>more useful to me.
>
>Craig
>
>Bruce,
>  
>
>>(I've changed the coding of this from HTML to plain text because the
>>system was putting part of it into an attachment, and the ATEG server was
>>blocking the message because of that.  This means that the OED entries
>>below have lost some special characters.)
>>
>>That's a very attractive analysis.  The words have a common history in
>>that the -ther, which is the historical suffix of which -er results from
>>metanalysis, is common to rather and another, as well as to other words
>>listed in the OED etymology I've copied below.  Of course, this is
>>etymology, not synchronic grammar, and, while grammatical behavior
>>reflects historical development, we can't rely on historical arguments to
>>describe how the grammar works today, only to explain how it got this
>>way.  I've also copied in the etymology of rather.
>>
>>OED Online etymology of "other"
>>
>>[Cognate with Old Frisian ther, r, Middle Dutch ander (Dutch ander), Old
>>Saxon ar, er, odar (Middle Low German ander), Old High German andar, ander
>>(Middle High German ander, German ander), Old Icelandic annarr, Old
>>Swedish annar (Swedish annan), Old Danish anner (Danish anden), Gothic
>>anar < the same Indo-European base as late Sanskrit antara difference,
>>(rarely) different from, other, Younger Avestan antara the other of two,
>>Lithuanian antras second, other, Latvian otrs second, other, and prob.
>>classical Latin alter < the Indo-European base of Sanskrit anya other,
>>different, Avestan aniia other, different + an Indo-European comparative
>>suffix also represented by Sanskrit -tara, ancient Greek -, classical
>>Latin -ter, English -ther (in NETHER adv.1, WHETHER pron., WITHER a.,
>>AFTER adv.), and the Old Irish equitive suffix -ithir.
>>  The Indo-European suffix seen in this word originally had a spatial
>>sense, expressing the contrast between two or more things with regard to
>>their location.
>>
>>OED Online etymology of "rather"
>>
>>[f. RATHE adv.; rare in OE. in place of hræd RAD a.1, but common after c
>>1400. For the uses of the compar. and superl. see RATHER a., RATHEST a.] 
>>Note that I categorically deny inviting anyone to commit the etymological
>>fallacy on the basis of this.
>>Herb
>>
>>Subject: Re: conjunction or preposition
>>
>>I appologize for my inappropriate response the question about the
>>comparative, which I took to be about ellipsis.  I like to present the
>>"-er + than" construction to my (ESL) students in connection with other
>>similar constructions. 
>> 
>>The first is with certain adjectives: "different + than" and "additional +
>>than."  In the case of "different" we have the option of using "from" when
>>we desire the preposition.   In the case of "additional" the option is to
>>use the preposition "to".  The possiblity of these complements tends to
>>make us want to see the "than" of "-er + than" as a preposition. 
>>The second parallel that can help in understanding the structure is the
>>set of adverbs whose normal complements are clauses or reduced clauses:
>>"so + that", "too + for-to" and "enough + for-to."  The complement clauses
>>then tend to be make us want to see the same structure with "-er +
>>than".  
>> 
>>In some cases one analysis is appropriate and in another, the other. 
>> 
>>Let me also share the following notion about the comparative ending. 
>>Notice that "rather", "another", and "other" share the above duality of
>>analysis, even though there are no corresponding positive forms for them. 
>>In this way they seem to be partaking of the adjective+complement
>>structure.  This could also be said for "more" except that we may take its
>>positive as "much" or "many".  Similarly "less" can be construed to have a
>>positive in (an elided) "much" or "many" which it modifies.  This again
>>opens the question of using ellipsis to understand the structures.   
>> 
>>1) Her stepsister had less dainty feet than Cinderella (had). 
>>[comparative adverb to "dainty" with complement]
>>2) She had less sand in her shoes than her stepsister (had).  [comparative
>>adverb to "much" with complement]
>>3) She tried less to get her shoes on than her stepsister (did).
>>[comparative adverb to the adverb of degree "much"]
>> 
>>Bruce
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>"Stahlke, Herbert F.W." <[log in to unmask]> 04/25/06 11:04 AM >>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>And we have a good example of why there is this tendency.  For a lot of
>>grammar teaching purposes I would treat the sentence as Phil has, but
>>for some purposes, including some pedagogical, I also want to be able to
>>explain that the "more ... than" dependency isn't just a fact about
>>particular words but follows from deeper syntactic and semantic
>>principles.
>>
>>I think this speaks to part of what we as a group are trying to provide:
>>a view of language that allows us to provide explanations that are
>>appropriate to need and to audience.
>>
>>Herb
>>
>>Subject: Re: conjunction or preposition
>>
>>I think there is a tendency to overthink these things in this group. 
>>
>>You can say
>>
>>  More pickup trucks are sold
>>
>>and you see that "more" is an adjective
>>
>>The addition is of "than sedan" is a very ordinary addition of a
>>prepositional phrase. 
>>
>>you cannot say
>>
>>  Pi! ckup trucks than sedands are sold
>>
>>which tells you that there is a dependent relation between "than" and
>>either "-er" and "more" or "less".  This dependency is what strikes
>>people as strange and is the only thing that is abberrant in the
>>sentence. 
>>
>>Phil Bralich
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>    
>>
>>>From: "Paul T. Wilson" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sent: Apr 25, 2006 8:43 AM
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Subject: Re: conjunction or preposition
>>>
>>>Though it's idiosyncratic, it seems to me that the concept of
>>>coordinating conjunctions might explain this more elegantly.
>>>
>>>Both pickup trucks and sedans are sold in some areas of California.
>>>
>>>Either pickup trucks or sedans are sold in some areas of California.
>>>
>>>I understand that
>>>
>>>(a) *more* can be adj., adv., or noun and *than* is typically a
>>>conjunction or preposition,  and
>>>
>>>(b)  "more . . . than" specifies a difference in quantity that "both .
>>>      
>>>
>>.
>>    
>>
>>>. and" and "either . . . or" do not.
>>>
>>>However, together, "more . . . than" seems to function the same way as
>>>the coordinating conjunctions.
>>>
>>>So I posit that *than* promotes *more* - functionally - to the status
>>>      
>>>
>>of
>>    
>>
>>>a conjunction.
>>>
>>>
>>>Jeanne Rodgers wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>How is "than" functioning in the following sentence, as a
>>>>        
>>>>
>>subordinating conjunction introducing an unconventionally placed
>>ellipitical clause or as a preposition?
>>    
>>
>>>>More pickup trucks than sedans are sold in some areas of California.
>>>>
>>>>Jeanne Rodgers
>>>>CSU, Sacramento
>>>>  
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>      
>>>
>>interface at:
>>    
>>
>>>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>      
>>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>interface at:
>>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
>>at:
>>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the
>>
>> intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
>>
>> privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
>>
>> disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
>>
>> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
>>
>> and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
>>at:
>>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>    
>>
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>  
>
Fellow Grammarians,

Let me ask about a related subject. Look at the following constructions. 
I consider them to be paraphrases of each other. Granted, the first is 
probably more acceptable in academic English, the second is more 
conversational (some of you may remember the Winston cigarette 
commercial: "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should. It may be bad 
grammar, but it's great taste."). The third, I'm not sure about.

I see the first as using "as" as a subordinator. In the second, I see 
"like" also as a subordinator. What I am not sure about is the third 
one. Is "the way" acting as a subordinator? They all seem to have the 
same structure, but do they?

                                  A. He thinks as I do.
                                  B. He thinks like I do.
                                  C. He thinks the way I do.

Marshall

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/