+0
Hi,

Which of the following two sentences is preferable and why?

"Snakes and Ladders is so much easier a game than Monopoly."

"Snakes and Ladders is so much easier of a game than Monopoly."

Normally, I would just say "Snakes and Ladders is a much easier game than Monopoly", but I sometimes find it necessary to use alternate structures such as the above to avoid redundancy. What do you think?
+0
Hi,
Which of the following two sentences is preferable and why?

"Snakes and Ladders is so much easier a game than Monopoly."

"Snakes and Ladders is so much easier of a game than Monopoly."

Normally, I would just say "Snakes and Ladders is a much easier game than Monopoly", but I sometimes find it necessary to use alternate structures such as the above to avoid redundancy. What do you think?

#1 is the standard form.
Just think of it as an unusual word order. You might rearrange the sentence as follows.

"Snakes and Ladders is a game so much easier than Monopoly."

Best wishes, Clive
Comments  
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Hi,

To me, the first, "Snakes and Ladders is so much easier a game than Monopoly." is far preferable to the second, which I would never use.

And why? Only because, to my native English ears, the second simply sounds wrong, and no native English-speaker is ever likely to say it. ;-)
Hi,

"Snakes and Ladders is so much easier of a game than Monopoly."

Actually, I hear native English-speakers say this a lot. In my opinion, it's a very common native-speaker error.

Best wishes, Clive
Hmmm, interesting, Clive: maybe it's just a Canadian thing!

I don't doubt your word, but I must admit I've never heard it used in England.

Going off at a tangent, I do often hear "would of" for "would've", and I've even seen it written as "would of" in emails I've received!

Anyway, in relation to my post above, I stand corrected....
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies