Teacher Discussion Forums

Hello people

I'd like to ask you some things about comparasion (and by extend the superlative):

1. The rule of the thumb is one syllable word adds an -ed at the end of a given word (cold-> colder, small-> smaller, tall-> taller, fast-> faster...)

1.1 But, I've seen lots of natives (mainly) deviate this "rule" by using the word more before the adjective (more green, more close, more wise...) I've seen natives utter such sentences and in songs, is this a common phenomena? May I say that English is simplifying step-by-step the construction of comparasions?

2. When the word has more than three syllables one has to put the word more before the adjective (beautiful-> more beautiful, intelligent-> more intelligent).

3. Now when it comes to two syllable words things get a little bit confusing:

3.1 For some words take both -ed or more (examples: simple-> more simple/simpler, clever-> more clever, cleverer), if one can use both forms which is more used, do you happen to know?

3.2 Can I use lesser as a comparative? Can you show me one or two examples?

And finally do you happen to know any on-line link which has a deeper study on the comparatives (not only the official rule but also the exceptions and the deviations)?

Thanks in advanced

José

"Lesser" is a comparative, as in:
"He is a relative of mine to a lesser degree..." (to a minor degree).

Metamorfose wrote:1.1 But, I've seen lots of natives (mainly) deviate this "rule" by using the word more before the adjective (more green, more close, more wise...) I've seen natives utter such sentences and in songs, is this a common phenomena? May I say that English is simplifying step-by-step the construction of comparasions?

I think American English is continually being influenced by Spanish, consequently Spanish contstructions are gradually creeping into US language (e.g. mas cerca). No native speaker of British English would say "more close", for example.

Iain

Hello people

Iain, I never gave it a thought, how Spanish has been influencing American English, that's quite interesting.

José

It's an interesting thought, but I don't see how you can show that it's a Spanish influence instead of some kind of way toward regularizing (that's a word? ) things--taking "more beautiful" and extending it.

That said, I still use the old-fashioned way (closer, etc.) but I will be on the lookout to see where and when people change it.

I think that even for American English speakers, the general rule still holds that one-syllable adjectives take -er/-est rather than coming after more/most. I have heard native speakers make mistakes with this, usually in long and complicated sentences in which they lost track of their grammatical train of thought. But I haven't heard mistakes like this often.

That said, though, I did have a question for the others on this board. Do you say "funner" or "more fun?" This is the one word that seems a possible exception to the rule. But tell me what you think. Maybe I'm wrong.

In two-syllable adjectives, I know that words ending in -y (easy, sloppy, rainy, etc.) almost always take -er/-est. I believe most other two-syllable adjectives tend to go with more/most, but this is a relatively grey area. Anyone out there have a more detailed rule than this?

As for "lesser," the most common example you'll come across is the phrase, "the lesser of two evils." (Faced with either telling a white lie or breaking my grandmother's heart, I chose the lesser of two evils and told her that the pie was delicious.)

-EH

EH wrote:I think that even for American English speakers, the general rule still holds that one-syllable adjectives take -er/-est rather than coming after more/most. I have heard native speakers make mistakes with this, usually in long and complicated sentences in which they lost track of their grammatical train of thought. But I haven't heard mistakes like this often.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Surely, comparatives aren't spread over long sentences.

Native speakers are always breaking the rules. Not blowing my own horn, but I'm a graduate and most of my friend tend to have spent a long time in the education system - or in other words the grammar rules have been pounded into me and my friends for many years. On the other side of the fence, there is another large group of native speakers for whom, phrases such as more colder than and I learned him how to are perfectly acceptable. These errors stem from the origins of the English language: in the first case, speakers are using both French and German comparative systems; in the second case speakers are using Learn in the same way that German or Dutch speakers would use it.

However, the american tendency to use comparatives with more, e.g. "more cold" instead of the standard germanic version, is either caused by a desired simplification of the language from within or some outside influence. Languages are evolving continuously, none more so that English. It is my suspision that American English is slowly being dragged over the language border by the large number of Latino speakers in the US.

Iain

To dduck!

I am a German speaker, and we do not use "lernen" in the sense of "teach" or "instruct", because we have the word "lehren" for that function.

However, if you were to investigate the usage of the verbs "borgen" and "leihen" then you could make a valid point along these lines.

Harzer

That said, though, I did have a question for the others on this board. Do you say "funner" or "more fun?" This is the one word that seems a possible exception to the rule. But tell me what you think. Maybe I'm wrong.

I don't think it's an exception; I think it is a noun, not an adjective. True, in some varieties of English we use it in a way that borders on adjectival use ("That was so fun!" "It was a fun exercise!") but I believe it's mostly in American English (? I'm Irish so I'm guessing) and it is actually a noun:

"We had a lot of fun"
"This is fun, don't you think?"

I would consider the adjective - though it nowadays has a different meaning - to be 'funny':
"He's a funny person. But she's funnier."

In the sense you used above, I would still continue to use it like a noun -
"This is a lot more fun than the previous exercise, isn't it?"

Any other varieties out there, anyone, anyone?

Harzer wrote:I am a German speaker, and we do not use "lernen" in the sense of "teach" or "instruct", because we have the word "lehren" for that function.

Thanks, for the correction. I'm still a bit puzzled how learn, meaning to teach, came about.

Webster wrote:Etymology: Middle English lernen, from Old English leornian; akin to Old High German lernEn to learn, Old English last footprint, Latin lira furrow, track

Perhaps, modern German has modified the meaning in the same way modern English has.

Webster wrote:usage Learn in the sense of "teach" dates from the 13th century and was standard until at least the early 19th <made them drunk with true Hollands--and then learned them the art of making bargains -- Washington Irving>. But by Mark Twain's time it was receding to a speech form associated chiefly with the less educated <never done nothing for three months but set in his back yard and learn that frog to jump -- Mark Twain>.

Rania wrote: I don't think it's an exception; I think it is a noun, not an adjective. True, in some varieties of English we use it in a way that borders on adjectival use ("That was so fun!" "It was a fun exercise!") but I believe it's mostly in American English (? I'm Irish so I'm guessing) and it is actually a noun:

According to Webster's, it's a noun, and an adjective. The adjective sometimes is inflected as funner, funnest. Can't remember the last time I heard those.

more fun, 1,780,000 hits
funner, 47,200 hit
most fun, 349,000 hits
funnest 52,600 hits

Iain

Everything clear for you now, Jose?

Larry Latham

Oh yeah Larry ,as clear as the bluest skies of summer

A "lesson" we all can maybe draw from this discussion is perhaps twofold:

1. While it is undeniable that languages are normative systems with generally regular ideas about what is right and what is wrong in their structures, it is equally clear that their rules don't carry the same precision as mathematical systems. There are some fuzzy edges, which, at least partly, are due to something that Iain mentioned in one of his posts above:

2. Living languages evolve continuously. Because of that, there are always certain aspects of a language that are in flux--in process of changing.

Still and all, it seems to me that making ourselves and our students aware of these few fuzzy areas (there really are not so many as some people seem to think) gives us power in the sense of having knowledge about what's clear and what's not quite so clear in the language we're using. Knowing this allows us to manipulate what we say, as well as what we hear, to better suit our particular purposes at the moment.

Larry Latham

Thanks to Rania and Dduck for replying to my funner/more fun question. I hadn't thought of it in terms of noun vs. adj usage, but now that you mention it that sounds like a very logical explanation of why there might be two different forms in use. Interesting also to know that there may be some differences between Irish and American usage.

Thanks,
-EH