Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Adverbs' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Adverbs'

a little and little as an adverb?

Anonymous — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 06:09:25 GMT

Hi, Please tell me if the same positive- and negative-polarity view points exist for their use as an adverb ike here where it is used with adjectives. 1)He is a little (positive??)/little (negative??) bad/good for my taste. 2) He was a little (positive??)/little (negative??) sad -- In this case, I think saying "He was little sad" is good since it looks to be sad to a little extent.

Re: adjective or part of a passive

CalifJim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 02:26:44 GMT

Believer
I have difficulty distinguishing between situations where a participle is used but ambiguous as to whether it is acting as an adjective or part of a passive. Do you have some guideline I can go by?

One wonders whether anything about your ability to use English in either its spoken or written form hinges on the ability to make such distinctions. Recognize that some cases are inherently ambiguous.

Nevertheless there are some guidelines if you wish to 'get into the weeds' of the various types of passive.

Believer
... things get confused when and where the 'by' seems to be almost impossible ... [as in] this case:
The work is finished.

Yes. I think I understand what you are getting at -- although for non-native speakers some of the guidelines may appear to be circular in nature.

According to Palmer (The English Verb), besides the plain vanilla 'passive' with an agent introduced by by (The man was killed by his wife.), which we may call the 'true passive', and the passive without an agent, or 'agentless passive' (The man was killed.), also a 'true passive', there are three other categories of passive -- the pseudo-passive, the semi-passive, and the statal passive. None of these three is a 'true passive'.

To understand the three types of 'false passive' (if you'd like to call them that!), it is first necessary to understand the tests for being an adjective, as enumerated by Palmer. These tests are as follows. An adjective generally can be used before a noun, after a linking verb, with the adverbs very, rather, more, or most, (sometimes with already), and coordinated with another adjective with and. Not all of these are possible for every adjective, but they are generally possible for most adjectives. The following examples show, with these tests, how finished is an adjective.

a finished product (use before a noun)

The work is finished. (use after a linking verb)

*very finished (not really possible, since finished is not gradable)

already finished (use with already)

It is finished and ready. (with and and another adjective)

________

Now for the categories.

The pseudo-passive has no corresponding active form and the past participle is completely adjectival.

The room seems very crowded. (Note the linking verb and very.)

The problem is complicated. (You could say very complicated or rather complicated. You could say difficult and complicated. You could say a complicated problem. These tests show that complicated is an adjective here.)

The semi-passive may appear to have a corresponding active form but is adjectival. Optionally, it may introduce the apparent agent with a preposition other than by, e.g., with or in. It may relate to emotional conditions. It may have negative forms with un-.

Jake was shocked by her behavior.

Roberta was worried about the exam.

Everyone was satisfied with the results.

We were quite uninterested in the presentation.

The statal passive is adjectival. The simple tense is very similar in meaning to the corresponding perfect tense, which (at least approximately) represents the corresponding agentless passive. Some examples can occur with already.

The glass is broken. (The glass has been broken.)

They were married for many years. ( They had been married for many years. Note married and happy, married couple, already married, unmarried -- signs of being an adjective.)

The exams are finished. (See the adjective tests for finished above.)

None of the three types discussed above are 'true passives'. It is often difficult to place a given usage exactly in one of the categories, so in spite of these guidelines, there are still ambiguous cases. Even some of the examples given above might be placed in a different category. Only context can resolve them.

(Unknown 22884)OHHH I FINALLY CAN POST!!!

Jen001 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 01:51:40 GMT

"The Change of the Characteristics in the passage from The Hours"

The passage from the novel The Hours by Michael Cunningham is intriguing. The passage illustrates the difference between the character's characteristics in different time settings: past and present. This difference is clearly shown through the contrasting structure, imagery and language.

The structure reflects the division of the time setting and helps to contrast the different characteristics. The passage has two paragraphs, each describing the character's thoughts and perception about a same place, of the past and present. The length of each paragraph is different; the one from the past is much longer than the other one from the present. This can be related to each of the paragraph's sentence construction. In the first paragraph, about the past, the lengths of the sentences are very long. The first sentence takes eight lines, lengthened continuously within commas, semi-colons and colons. In fact, in one sentence, there are five commas, five semi-colons and a colon. This overly-continued sentence gives a sense of unfiltered, informal, and unrestricted flowing of thoughts. Moreover, the use of brackets, âsome sort of wood(cedar? Camphor?),â seems to be less sophisticated, compared to using dashes or other punctuations of the same function. However, in the second paragraph of the present, the sentence construction is shown contrastingly. The paragraph starts with a short simple sentence: âShe turns down Bleecker, goes up Thomson.â Also, in this paragraph, there are four sentences in six lines, and three of the four sentences are written in simple sentence, including the example above. Although there are a few commas in some of the sentences, there is no semi-colon, but only a colon in the last sentence. The colon is used in a very appropriate way, functioning to introduce the list of âthingsâ, such as âjewelryâ and âjackets.â Thus, within the brief and concise sentence construction, the character in the present appears to be more mature, filtered and sophisticated than in the past. However, as a result of that, the sense of youthful, unfiltered freedom cannot be found anymore in the present.

In addition to the structure, the contrasting imagery of each paragraph demonstrates further differences of the characteristic in the past and present. As both paragraphs are of the same setting, the image of the same place is described at each time. So, the consistent place makes the comparison between the two more distinctive and reliable. The imagery of the place is very vivid in the past, not only within the visual sense, but also within the auditory and olfactory senses, whereas that of the past only relies on the sense of sight. For example, in the past, âthe neighborhoodâ is depicted as âthe center of something new and wildâ in âthe city where the sound of guitars drifted all nightâ and âwhere the stores â¦ smelled the way â¦ Arab bazaars must smell.â This is detail, imaginative and lively, even the âArab bazaarsâ creates a somewhat mystical and adventurous atmosphere. This interesting and passionate depiction is being minimized in the present into three words: an âimitation of itself.â It is now âa watered-down carnival for tourists,â which gives a sense of inactivity and boredom. Also, the stores now âall sell essentially the same things,â such as âsouvenir T-shirts.â This seems to be dull, with no excitement or creativity or passion. This changed imagery, depicted by the character, rather shows the change in the character's perception. The change in perception is demonstrated more clearly within the notion of the âdoorâ and âalley.â In the past, she says, âif you passed through the wrong door or down the wrong alley you would meet a fate,â however, in the present, she âknows that behind these doors, and down these alleys lies nothing more or less than people living their lives.â In the past, she seems to be more concerned with the 'inner' world of thought or imagination. Whereas in the present, she seems to be more grounded in the external world of physical reality. As like the previously discussed change in the sentence structure, she is now more sophisticated, knowledgeable and realistic than the past. Also, as like the image of the place, her perception changed from the creative, interesting and adventurous to the boring, predictable and filtered way. Thus, the contrasting imagery of the past and present reflects the similar change in the character's perception.

While the structure and the imagery convey the distinctive change in the characteristics of the character, the contrasting use of language supports those differences. More specifically, the diction [dash]shown in the past and the present[dash] is comparable. Reflecting the imagery of the varied senses, the words and expressions used in the past are also varied and animated, such as âincense and richâ and âdung-y dustâ describing the smell of the stores. These two expressions, âincense and richâ and âdung-y dustâ are contrasting; they express the diversity of the object. Moreover, the speaker creates a non-existing adjective, âdung-y.â The extra adding of â-yâ grants a more animated image, and it gives a sense of freedom and even somewhat childishness. The âsmellâ is then described as âsomething fruitily, fertilely rotting.â Again, she creates a non-existing adverb, âfruitily,â expressing the scent rather vividly, which would be sour as it ârots.â The other adverb âfertilelyâ contributes to create a sense of abundance and richness of the imagery. However, the use of those two positive adverbs, modifying the negative verb ârottingâ seems to be oxymoron in âfruit[full]â or âfertile,â as well as the use of adjective âdisreputable,â following ânew and wild.â The oxymoron adds an unpredictable sense to the imagery and hence to the depicter's thoughts. On the other hand, in the present, the adjectives used to describe the âcityâ and the âstores,â are ânothing,â âless,â âsame,â and âstill.â All of them are negative and reflect the boredom, dullness and hopelessness. More significantly, the speaker uses the adverb, âGrotesquelyâ before describing how âthe same bars and coffeehouses are still [th]ereâ, showing the character's cynical characteristic. So does the use of the adjective âcheapâ for the goods at the stores. Thus, in the past, the character uses language interestingly [dash] it is diverse, lively and creative [dash] whereas that of the past is inactive, hopeless and cynical. These differences are directly reflecting the character's contrasting, changed characteristic.

The change of the characteristic seems to be abrupt. As a cause, something would have happened to her, that is not shown in the passage. However, an assumption can be drawn within the evidences from the passage. There is a shift in the first paragraph within âHere,â showing the shifted tense from the past to the past perfect. In the past perfect, there is a scene of Clarissa, the major character, and her boyfriend Richard. She seems to appreciate Richard a lot, for example, she does not use the pronoun 'he' for âRichard,â even though he is the only male character. So, in a sentence, Richard is successively repeated three times, âwith Richard, when Richard â¦ when Richard.â Moreover, she describes his appearance in detail; he âwas nineteen,â âa firm-featured, hard-eyed, not-quite-beautiful dark-haired boy with an impossibly long and graceful, very pale neck.â So, to describe Richard, she combines an adjective and a noun to create a single adjective, such as âhard-eyed.â This shows her seriousness about describing him precisely. His âimpossibly longâ and âvery paleâ neck would seem negative, if not for the complementary adjective âgraceful.â Also, the adverb âimpossiblyâ gives a sense of special and unusual feeling for the person. Besides the use of language, the use of punctuation should also be noted. There are many commas, causing the sentences to seem choppy. This would be imitating the feeling of uncertainty and the tension in the situation. The uncertainty of the situation is shown in the line, ââ¦about what? A kiss? Had Richard kissed her, or had she, Clarissaâ¦,â also the tension created as they âhad certainly argued.â Then, the reason for the âargu[ment]â is explained: âClarissa wanted her freedom and Richard wanted, well, too much.â It is notable that as Richard âwanted â¦ too muchâ relating to the âkiss,â the pronoun 'he' is used as âdidn't he always?â In this case, however, the pronoun 'he' seems to more likely indicate every 'man', rather than particularly âRichard.â Thereafter the paragraph ends, and the paragraph of the present starts. It is not sure whether the abrupt change in Clarissa's characteristic is due to âRichardâ or not. Although it is not, it is evident that Clarissa once considered and cared about him quite specially.

Despite of the uncertain reason, the change in the Clarissa's characteristic from the past to the present is shown clearly throughout the contrasting structure, imagery and language. The characteristic includes the thoughts and perception, which were unrestricted, unfiltered, creative and animated in the past; whereas in the present, they are shown restricted, filtered, dull and inactive. The change is extreme, but no particular evidence for the extremity is being suggested, except the short scene with Richard. Thus, this passage not only introduces the setting and the character, but also evokes the reader's curiosity: What has happened to Clarissa?

------------------------------------------------

I really really really appreciate for your help... Thank you..!

Re: grammar questions

Mister Micawber — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:39:42 GMT

1) Are my sentences correct but with a different meaning? I didn't quite get the nuance between the 2 prepositions. Would you please explain the difference again?

a) "The plays had been / were performed THROUGHOUT the next ten years"-- many times /every year in that period
b) "He had acted / had been acting / acted/ DURING the next ten years" -- no indication of frequency of performance in that period

2) position of adverbs: which ones are correct English? Which ones are spoken and which ones are written?

(a) He PROBABLY wouldN'T have met him. -- informal
(b) He would PROBABLY NOT have met him.-- both

(d) He would PROBABLY have NEVER met him.-- both

e) He would PROBABLY NEVER have met him. -- both

3) negative past form of "I used do it"
a) I used not to do it -- primarily BrE
b) I did not use to do it -- primarily AmE ('didn't used to' also in use i BrE)

7) singular or plural:
a) the datE of birth and death is registered / inscribed-- avoid this one; it just creates a conundrum.
b) the datES of birth and death are registered -- OK

8) vocabulary + tense: Would you please tell me if these expressions are correct?
a) Tom feared / was afraid / was scared that that his body would be incinerated once he WAS dead. -- OK

b) To act out (= perform ?) a play
Othello was first ACTED OUT at the theatre in... -- OK

c) early in his career / when he justed started working = a ses dÃ©buts ? -- I don't speak Green.

d) does the word "play-performer" exist?-- If it does it should be eschewed. Use 'actor'.

grammar questions

Anonymous — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 06:14:21 GMT

Dear teachers,

Would you please help me with the following difficuties?

1) Are my sentences correct but with a different meaning? I didn't quite get the nuance between the 2 prepositions. Would you please explain the difference again?

a) "The plays had been / were (?) performed THROUGOUT / DURING the next ten years"
b) "He had acted / had been acting / acted (?) THROUGHOUT / DURING the next ten years"

2) position of adverbs: which ones are correct English? Which ones are spoken and which ones are written?

(a) He PROBABLY wouldN'T have met him.
(b) He would PROBABLY NOT have met him.

(d) He would PROBABLY have NEVER met him.

e) He would PROBABLY NEVER have met him.

3) negative past form of "I used do it"
a) I used not to do it
b) I did not use to do it

7) singular or plural:
a) the datE of birth and death is registered / inscribed (?)
b) the datES of birth and death are registered

8) vocabulary + tense: Would you please tell me if these expressions are correct?
a) Tom was scared that (?) / feared that his body would be insinerated once he WAS dead.

b) To act out (= perform ?) a play
Othello was first ACTED OUT at the theatre in...

c) early in his career / when he justed started working = a ses dÃ©buts ?

d) does the word "play-performer" exist?

A thousand thanks,
Hela

Re: a little and little

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:41:27 GMT

Thank you, Yankee, Doll and GG.

Is there any difference between using the two 'little' and 'a little' adjectivally and as an adverb. I think I understand the positive and negative aspects of the two when used adjectivally. Can we apply the same concept when used as an adverb?

1. As an adjectively (as Doll seems to have done):

He speaks a little English. -- Not well but enough to get by

2. But can we apply the same concept for a case involving its adverbial use?

He plays soccer a little -- Not well but possesses the level of skill enough to get by?? Looking at it positively

Re: I need your help,please.

Avangi — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:36:54 GMT

1. "women" - use plural to match "the elderly" & "are more LIKELY"

2. The goals of our program ARE - use plural verb with plural subject

3. MANY benefits - "Much" is for stuff; "many" is for things you can count.

4. there IS a lot of space (missing verb in clause) & IN which he could write (or) WHERE he could write

5. (wrong choice of conjunctions) use "but" instead of "or"

6. in ALMOST every country

7. is EXTREMELY important (use adverb form to modify predicate adjective)

8. positive OR negative (conjunction)

9. While I WAS TAKING a walk (past tense to match "saw") & RAKING (wrong words - "talking" for "taking" and "ranking" for "raking")

10. to care FOR their parents

11. five LAPTOP TESTS ("tests" is a noun - object of the preposition - and is plural because there are five. "Laptop" is an adjective in this case and doesn't have to agree. It could be a noun if used alone, like "Five laptops were found to be defective.")

12. INSECTS (plural to agree with animals) & I think "fossilized" is the better adjective & I'd suggest using two separate sentences: "insects. Fossilized" & a period at the end

13. I think this is okay. It needs a period at the end.

Congratulations on your first post!

please help

Taichimaster — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 10:57:40 GMT

1.Is it necessary to use the negative adverb in this sentence structure <Rarely does he play snooker.>?

Can I write like this <Frequantly does he play snooker.>

2.Is it a must to write <so or such> in this sentence structure <Talk shows are so/such popular that almost every TV network has at least one. >?

3.Is it correct that placing 2 fullstops in such sentence<He was hired in ABC, Inc..>?

Because we need to place a fullstop after <Inc>.

A little or little

Believer — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 01:20:30 GMT

Hi,

When a person is trying to use the phrase 'a little' or the word 'little' as an adverb or as a phrase, how can he do so correctly when both means pretty much the same, at least to me, to mean 'a small extent'?

little -- means 'a small extent' as an adverb

a little or a little bit -- means 'a small extent' as a phrase

To apply in sentences can be tricky.

I can speak English little. -- Can speak English to a small degree (not much), but written or spoken in a negative light.

I can speak English a little bit -- Can speak English to a small degree (not much, but written or spoken in a positive light.

Let us change the verb to that expresses more action.

I can dance little -- ditto?

I can dance a little bit -- ditto?

But what about this?

Joe has been gone little -- Is that mean Joe has gone (away) a little while?

Should we use 'a little' and 'little' in the capacity indicated selectively in relation to using it after a verb? How could I know when I can use them to mean the things I meant to say? If you know what I mean. Thank you.

Re: BUT, pronoun, verb

Clive — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:59:38 GMT

Hi,

In fact, if you look in a good dictionary you will see that the word but has six jobs to do:

verb, noun, adverb, pronoun, preposition and conjuction! http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/parts-of-speech_3.htm

I cannot find any examples of but used as a verb or a pronoun in the online dictionary. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/but

Can anyone help me?

My dictionary lists it as a verb in the standard phrase 'But me no buts'. However, I don't really think that makes it a 'real' verb.

My older Concise Oxford Dictionary lists 'but' as a 'negative relative pronoun'. I think the relevant example from its long list is 'I don't doubt but that she loves you'. However, it's pretty odd and unusual. If I were you, I wouldn't concern myself with 'but' as a pronoun.

Best wishes, Clive