Brett,
    I like your arguments for "ago" as distinct. Very helpful.
    I think when it comes to traditional categories, we should err on the side of inertia (or conservatism) because we would otherwise be asking people (admittedly not a large group these days) to change a trusted way of thinking. It's not like we are looking at alternative proposals in a vacuum. If the arguments are equal, I would vote for the status quo.
   This would include, of course, "subordinating conjunction" as a traditional category. So "two days before they did" uses before as subordinating conjunction or as "preposition" acting as head of an adverbial clause. Again, that's asking people to change their current frame of reference.
   We might have a similar problem with words that start as verbs or nouns and then become common in the other category. Hope, fear, and desire are examples that come quickly to mind. Currently, a good dictionary will classify them as both. If I flip open a dictionary, I see that even "hole," which I would call noun if you asked, is also a verb in sentences like "he holed his third shot." We have plenty of precedent for words floating into other categories, and traditionally we put that word into more than one category if the use is a common use.
   But I have an open mind. I can see the arguments on the other side.

Craig
On 10/6/2010 3:26 PM, Brett Reynolds wrote:
> On 2010-10-06, at 2:40 PM, Assembly for the Teaching of English
> Grammar wrote:
>
>> I never quite bought in to the Huddleston and Pullum suggestion
>> that we treat these as prepositions in all instances.
>
> I think it was Jespersen's suggestion. Huddleston & Pullum just
> followed up on it. What concerns do you have with it?
>
>> But there is a logic to it that is parallel to seeing a noun
>> phrase as noun phrase even when it's adverbial in function. It may
>> make sense, though, to think of them as complements (ratheer than
>> modifiers) if only because they don't work for all adverbs, or
>> even for all adverbs derived from prepositions.*
>
> But 'very' doesn't work for all adjectives. I don't think that's a
> problem. The point is that you can't simply have: "*I went there
> ago." But "I went there (two days) before" is fine, as are "I went
> there (two days) before Reiko" or "I went there (two days) before
> they did."
>
>> "many years until."* "Many places to." We can say "many steps
>> down" or "two stops beyond." Or "a whole month away" (this last one
>> pure adverb, I think.)
>
> I'm pretty sure H & P would have it as a preposition, usually
> followed by a 'from' PP complement.
>
>> There may be more, but it seems to me they somewhat constellate
>> around time and space, giving us extent or duration or range.
>
> As is typical for prepositions.
>
> Best, Brett
>
> ----------------------- Brett Reynolds English Language Centre
> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
> Toronto, Ontario, Canada [log in to unmask]
>
> 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/