Search results for 'tag:Constructions tag:Indefinite articles' matching tags 'Constructions' and 'Indefinite articles'

mass noun and count noun

Jackson6612 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:04:57 GMT

mass noun
a noun (as sand or water) that characteristically denotes in many languages a homogeneous substance or a concept without subdivisions and that in English is preceded in indefinite singular constructions by some rather than a or an
[M-W's Dictionary]

count noun
a noun (as bean or sheet) that forms a plural and is used with a numeral, with words such as many or few, or with the indefinite article a or an
[M-W's Dictionary]

1: What is an indefinite singular construction?
2: What is an indefinite plural construction?
3: What is an definite singular construction?
4: What is an definite plural construction?
5: As name suggests a count noun is countable, then how can one use indefinite article a or an with it?

Re: genitive as a noun

Believer — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:24:40 GMT

Thank you, Eimai_Anglos.

Are you saying a genitive cannot be made a countable noun or used as a countable noun? I think a guru has delivered expert advice on that aspect of grammar and I think it has been said a construction like "a shaking of a ground" means "an instance of shaking of a ground." Please note that it is a shaking in what seems to be a countable noun form.

Can you give me your expertise in this matter?

1. Why can some genitives have the indefinite article "a" like the genitive noun word "shaking"?

2. At the same time, why don't I never seem to have encountered a plural form of the word "shaking" as "shakings"?

3. Here, "with shouting, yelling and swearing, the motorists ...," would you say the phrase "with shouting, yelling and swearing" is correctly written? If it is correctly written, then what kind of noun are they? My dictionary seems to note that "shouting" is a countable noun but for the two others, I am not sure.

Thank you.

Re: Hero

BruceInUK — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:32:50 GMT

"He is a hero." is correct.

"hero" is a noun, so it needs to be qualified by an article (in this case, the indefinite article).

The second sentence construction would be correct only with an adjective instead of a noun, e.g.

He is heroic.

Re: three questions in a queue

Goodman — Tue, 23 May 2006 19:10:44 GMT

Your phrasing and terminology are very confusing. So I am guessing on your questions.

during the-period-after-the-surgery â The way you had it written, I see a conflict between âDuringâ and âAfterâ, unless there is something missing you didnât tell us.

I could say â During the one-week trial period after the purchase of this product, you can return the product any time and receive a full refund, no question askâ. I am using the same construct but with complete context.

I think the main "bone" of the phrase is "during the surgery." â What is a âboneâ? Do you mean âcoreâ?

2. Are (Do) they mean the same thing? No, if you refer to âduringâ and âafterâ.

They would feel right, (wouldnât it? ) isn't it?

They would not feel right, (would it?) is it?

3. In the sentence, I feel the use of an indefinite article "a" consecutively and repeatedly do not render a pretty picture as to the sentential construction is concerned. What do you think? --- What sentence? Please clarify your question.

A Quaker is a ("the" is better???) person who belongs to a Christian group called the Society of Friends. The answer is ânoâ.

A true friend is someone who will stand by your side in time of trouble. [ Not âtheâ]

The only friend who stood by me what Paul when I was feeling down. [ Not âAâ]

three questions in a queue

Believer — Tue, 23 May 2006 18:03:15 GMT

1. I have encountered this phrase from a post and have been wondering what is the main element involved here? Can you make this kind of sentences at your will or are there any rules involved?

during the-period-after-the-surgery

I think the main "bone" of the phrase is "during the surgery."

2. Are they mean the same thing?

They would feel right, isn't it?

They would not feel right, is it?

3. In the sentence, I feel the use of an indefinite article "a" consecutively and repeatedly do not render a pretty picture as to the sentential construction is concerned. What do you think?

A Quaker is a ("the" is better???) person who belongs to a Christian group called the Society of Friends.

Re: A problem with 'problem'

komountain — Sat, 08 Oct 2005 19:41:27 GMT

You are right, Paco. The word 'problem' is definitely a countable noun. That's why when I first encountered the expression 'have x problem -ing,' perhaps decades ago, I thought it's a rather unusual construction. This peculiarity compelled me to memorize the expression by rote then. Along the way, the eccentricity, if you will, seemed to have been supported by the sentences I occasionally came across. Here is another sentence retrieved from my personal data. If my memory serves me right, the sentence was taken from either a newspaper or a magazine.

Small- and medium-sized businesses have problem getting people to work for them.

If it's a typo, the case is settled.

(p.s.: Remember I always enjoy reading your posts.)

Davkett.

Thank you for your comments. Can't the indefinite article 'a' be an optional item in this particular construction? Well, it could have derived from its analogy, in terms of both construction and meaning, to the expression 'have difficulty -ing' where 'a' is not used.

Re: What's the logic behind this?

MrPedantic — Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:25:13 GMT

Thanks, Eagle, Paco, and MisterM for all your painstaking posts! Much to chew on.

1.

It's odd that both your and K's dictionaries give this structure, which I seldom if ever hear. Maybe it's more common elsewhere.

Sorry, all: I should have been clearer. I meant the âChild as he wasâ¦â construction seemed unusual to me. (âChild thoughâ¦â and âChild thatâ¦â donât seem strange.)

2.

'N as S V' structure in which 'as' means 'though' is no longer acceptable in modern English.

Your bean isnât necessarily antique, K. It may be that my experience is limited.

In my first post, I was flummoxed by the sense:

âChild as he was, he could outwit the robber.â

I took âChild asâ¦â to mean not âChild thoughâ¦â but âBeing a childâ¦â. So my reading was in conflict with the intended sense: âChild thoughâ¦â is concessive, but âchild asâ¦â (I thought) was simply complementary.

This interpretation was supported by the quote from Dickens:

'Child as he was, he was desperate with hunger, and reckless with misery.'

Here, âasâ canât mean âthoughâ: children are not immune to hunger and misery. So it must mean âsince he was a childâ.

However, this example from Pacoâs post:

âChild as he is, he can think clearly and act wiselyâ

(where âasâ must = âthoughâ) shows that my original interpretation was wrong. The sense here is clearly concessive. So I can only assume that either Dickens got his idiom slightly wrong, or âChild asâ¦â had a simple complementary sense in his day.

3.

'Fool that he was, he managed to evade his pursuers.'

Now this caught my eye in MisterMâs post. There does indeed seem to be a difference here between AmE and BrE:

a) AmE - 'Fool that he was, he managed to evade his pursuers.'
= âFool though he wasâ¦â â OK in AmE, as MisterM says.

b) BrE - 'Fool that he was, he managed to evade his pursuers.'
= âBeing the fool that he was, he managed to evade his pursuersâ, which is nonsensical.

So I would have to make the 2nd clause negative, to understand it:

'Fool that he was, he nonetheless managed to evade his pursuers.'

Interestingly, as JTT points out, this does add a slightly disparaging note; and the same form can also be used metaphorically:

âChild that he was, he would not accept my conclusionsâ â i.e. he was behaving childishly.

(MisterM's second example has this non-concessive sense of 'as' too: 'Clumsy idiot that he was, Michael completely ruined the dinner.')

4.

The noun has the role of a characterizing attribute [cf. 'he turned traitor' -- MM]."

That sounds much better than my âellipsisâ suggestion â especially as I can find no examples in earlier literature of a common, fuller version.

Also, it occurs to me that âfrontingâ of the noun is common in e.g. early alliterative poetry in Germanic languages. So we would have to go a long way back to find evidence of ellipses. And I suppose you couldn't 'front', if you included the article...and there's nowhere else to put it...

(That does still leave the question of why we omit the indefinite article with a âcharacterizing attributeâ; but for another day.)

MrP

Re: One dictionary says...

paco2004 — Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:39:22 GMT

Hi MrP and Casi

Here's another article supposedly relating to our discussion, which I just skimmed it. Sounds the construction "[adj] or [a noun] of [a noun]" is an expression used to show speaker's emotion.
Ora Matsushansky

By the way OED mentions about the construct [so/how/that/too a noun] in a part of the entry of the indefinite article a like this:

A follows the adjectives as in many a, such a, what a! and the obsolete or dialectal each a, which a; it follows any adjectives preceded by how, so, as, too, as how large a sum; and in earlier English the genitive phrases what manner, no manner, whatkins, nakins, what sort, etc., as what manner a man (= cu jus modi homo?) In none of these was the a found in Old English.
Many a is not to be confused with the approximative a many. Such a was earlier a such. Each a and which a survive in the north, as ilk a, whilk a. What manner a, and its likes soon became corrupted to what manner of.

I think this is little informative but what interestes me a little is that those special constructs were created (or imported?) at the time of Middle English.

paco

Re: One dictionary says...

MrPedantic — Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:29:39 GMT

Hello Paco

First, I should answer your previous question about the 'emphatic forms with no reasonable normal form'. My thought here is that it's perfectly idiomatic to say:

'You are too good a cook to sack.'

âwhich looks like the same construction as 'this is too tough a question to answer'. So it ought to be possible to work backwards to a regular form (with the construction of 'these questions are too tough to answer').

But in fact, no such form exists â all we can create are forms that are never used, e.g.

'The cook (i.e. you) is too good to sack'
'You as a cook are too good to sack'.

(I use the terms 'emphatic form' and 'normal form', because the 'too X a Y to' construction is used when more emphasis is required.)

Now to your latest question:

I feel as if what you talked about is something like that "this flower is red" must be changed into "this is a red flower" when one transposes the noun 'flower'. I'll not argue against this argument itself. But I think one could say "these are red flowers" as the noun-transposed sentence of "these flowers are red". If it is the case, why can't we say "these are too tough questions to answer" as the noun-transposed sentence of "these questions are too tough to answer"?

I'll try to show the movement I think occurs when the 'too X a Y to' structure is used:

1. This too red flower â specific.
2. This flower is too red to put there â specific.
3. This is too red a flower to put there â specific + non-specific.

At this point, we have movement. The phrase 'this flower' divides; 'this' still refers to the specific flower, but the word 'flower' now has an indefinite (i.e. non-specific) meaning.

If however the noun is plural, this movement doesn't happen:

1a. These too red flowers â specific.
2a. These flowers are too red to put there â specific.
3a. These are too red flowers to put there â specific.

At this point, there is no movement. The phrase 'these flowers' divides, but both 'these' and 'too red flowers' refer to the specific flowers. 'Too red' here simply describes; whereas in 'too red a flower', it distinguishes. Nor can an indefinite article can be inserted â

3b. *These are too red a flowers to put there.
3c. *These are too red a flower to put there.

(It occurred to me that the 3c structure might exist as an 'ungrammatical' alternative; but a few experimental googles showed that it's surprisingly unused. Try googling on 'these are too good a', for instance.)

Another curious feature of 3a is that it seems to have the opposite meaning to the one we want â in 2a, the flowers are not to be 'put there'; in 3a, they are!

I hope this explains the hypothesis a little better, but let me know if it doesn't!

MrP

Re: About "too...to..."

Mister Micawber — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:56:08 GMT

Well, let me see if I can attack your concerns in a sort of slap-dash fashion. First, let me collect our sentences:

1: She is a too clever woman to stay in so boring a job.
1a: She is too clever a woman to stay in so boring a job.
2: She is too clever a woman to stay in such a boring job.
3: These are too tough questions to answer.
4: It's too dirty water to drink.
5: There are too many children to feed.

I'm going to ignore for a minute your and the dictionaries' comments, and just tell you I think that only 1a, 2 and 5 seem acceptable in written English, but that 1, 3, and 4, though they sound awkward to my ears, could well be heard in the spoken language. It is an unusual formation that lends itself to unplanned variations. (And of course we have the same situation with 'so boring a job' vs X 'a so boring job'.)

For the grammatical argument, Quirk et. al. have simply this to say:

'When an adjective phrase modified by 'too' in turn modifies a singular count noun, the phrase precedes the indefinite article. There is no plural or noncount equivalent for this construction. Instead, we have to postpone the adjective phrase.'

Hence, (1a) is correct, but (3) must read 'these are questions too tough to answer' and (4) 'it's water too dirty to drink'. I would think that part of the confusion arises from the additional use of 'too' as a synonym of 'very', as in 'that is too/very true' or (3) 'these are too/very tough questions to answer', as also it does from your exception in (5)-- 'two many children to feed', 'too little water to drink', etc.

With regard to your comment that 'dictionaries sometimes contain information useful
for only those who study old English', I am interested in whether you are speaking of the major English language dictionaries or of bilingual ones. The former do indeed contain a virtual history of a word's meanings, all of which are presumably still available for use, but many of which are indeed dated; this is often left for the native user to intuit, but a non-native user may not have the cultural grounding to do this.

On the other hand, in Japan at least, the popular bilingual dictionaries, because they must encompass two languages, usually contain only a portion of the meanings, and by the lazier editors these are skimmed from the top half of the original English source dictionaries-- which are also the historically oldest meanings, not necessarily the most current.