+0
Hello teachers.

Recently I've read an article in my grammar book, which is saying that there are some semantic differences among the three:
[1] I found that the chair was comfortable.
[2] I found the chair to be comfortable.
[3] I found the chair comfortable.

Do you really feel they are different in the meaning?

paco
1 2
Comments  
I don't. I'm curious as to what your GB says about it, though.
For example, [url=""]this article[/url] says:
[1] I found that the chair was comfortable.
[2] I found the chair comfortable.
The second sentence indicates that I found out that the chair was comfortable by direct experience-by sitting in it. The first sentence leaves open the possibility that I found it out indirectly-say, by asking people or taking a survey. In the second sentence, the form I is closer to the forms the chair and comfortable. The syntax of the sentence indicates the directness of the experience with the chair by which I found that the chair was comfortable. The closer the form I is to the forms the chair and comfortable, the more direct is the experience that is indicated. Here the effect of the syntax is to indicate the directness of the experience, and closeness indicates the strength of that effect

paco
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Oh yes, I suppose so. But in your samples, there is no difference because no one goes around asking about chairs-- they just sit in them themselves and find out. If you have a particular facet of language to explore, there is no point in choosing examples where an effect is muffled or masked. Set up some examples that might really reveal a difference:

I found Hitler charming.
I found that Hitler was charming.
Thanks. So [1a] is better than [1b] and [2b] is better than [2a]. Right?

[1a] Looking at his portrait, I found Hitler charming.
[1b] Looking at his portrait, I found that Hitler was charming.

[2a] Reading his biography, I found Hitler charming.
[2b] Reading his biography, I found that Hitler was charming.

paco
No-- they are both similar, semi-direct experiences by the speaker of the dictator; therefore the difference you are looking for is not in evidence in these contexts. We need to look at clear uses:

Meeting him in person in his bunker, I found Hitler charming.
After interviewing a number of the Schutzstaffel, I found that Hitler was charming.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Hello MM

I think I've got the difference. I'm surprised to know "Schutzstaffel" is an English word entried in OED. Thanks.

paco
Hello MM and Paco

I find it quite difficult to find a difference between the two. 'I found' always seems 'direct experience' to me. In your examples, I would be more inclined to say:

1. ...I found MrQ charming.
2. ...I found out that MrQ was 'charming'.

If I heard:

3. After talking to everyone on English Forums, I found that MrQ was charming.

I would take it as deliberate irony, where the dryness depended on using the direct-experience 'I found' in a once-removed situation.

But maybe there's a regional difference here.

MrP
'I find it quite difficult to find..."
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more