Alphadictionary.com

Our Sponsors

Technical Translation
Website Translation Clip Art
 

ROUGHSHOD

Use this forum to discuss past Good Words.

Postby Brazilian dude » Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:21 pm

What about a hoary lady? Doesn't sound Latin to me, though. Further inquiry is necessary.

Brazilian dude
Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil


Postby Brazilian dude » Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:30 pm

Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil

Multifuncionality

Postby Dr. Goodword » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:10 am

Look out for multifuncionality in English. English is losing affixes (-er, -est, -ed) at quite a clip, but not grammatical functions. The result is that the remaining affixes take on those functions left by affixes that have disappeared in addition to their traditional ones.

The suffix -ed, as several of you pointed out, not only marks Past Tense, Past Participle, but adjectives, particularly those meaning "Having N", such as forested, fruited, and--for some reason--my favorite, bearded.

As even this adjectival suffix disappears (double-barrel[led] shotgun, fruit[ed] jello, etc.) it is more and more limited to compound adjectives like white-haired, long-armed, and white shoed.

Why not white-shod? Because we simply don't use the verb any more outside reference to horses. We wouldn't say, "After he shod himself" rather than "after he put his shoes on." This is a question of usage rather than grammar.
• The Good Dr. Goodword
User avatar
Dr. Goodword
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:28 am
Location: Lewisburg, PA

Postby Apoclima » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:02 am

"A glamorously shod woman came into the restaurant the other day. No one could take their eyes off her shoes."

Apo
'Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination.' -Max Planck
User avatar
Apoclima
Senior Lexiterian
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:00 pm

Postby anders » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:02 am

You mustn't forget the "s" in her Pinkness, the IPU (mhhnbs)!

Any remaining infidels, please educate yourselves at, for example, http://www.palmyra.demon.co.uk/humour/ipu.htm
Irren ist männlich
anders
Lexiterian
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 7:46 am
Location: Sweden

Postby Brazilian dude » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:05 am

But if shoed and haired are adjectives in white-shoed and white-haired lady (they are doubtless adjectives on their own), what is white before them? Can an adjective modify another adjective? That's unheard of! The only thing that can modify adjectives are adverbs, and white is definitely not an adverb. Can we say that both white and shoed/haired are adjectives on their own right that modify lady? I don't think so. The lady may have white hair and white shoes and be black, yellow, or pink with yellow spots.

Brazilian dude
Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil

Postby Flaminius » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:31 am

I doubt if the suffix -ed automatically makes an adjective out of the affixed hair. An expression like "a haired man" is a bit clumsy. In your example, Bradu, it is more appropriate to think the -ed derives an adjective from the entire noun compound "grey hair." In this analysis "grey" can remain an adjective since it first connects with "hair" to make the noun compound that derives another adjective by affixing the -ed.

Flam
Flaminius
Lexiterian
 
Posts: 408
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:36 am

Postby Brazilian dude » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:32 am

That's exactly what I said before, Flam. Thanks for corroborating it, though.

Brazilian dude
Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil

Postby Flaminius » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:08 pm

Brazilian dude wrote:But if shoed and haired are adjectives in white-shoed and white-haired lady (they are doubtless adjectives on their own). . .

versus
Dr Beard wrote:[The adjectival suffix -ed] is more and more limited to compound adjectives like white-haired, long-armed, and white shoed.


But if you confirm that I am as smart as you are by agreeing with me, what have I more to say?

Flam
Flaminius
Lexiterian
 
Posts: 408
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:36 am

Postby Brazilian dude » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:06 pm

But you're more smarter :wink:, but you know the 8th place is taken already.

Brazilian dude
Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil

Postby tcward » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:21 pm

BD, I do not doubt that somewhere in the world someone is using the word shoe as a verb. As one of my favorite posters likes to say, one of the nice things about English is you can verb any noun.

And as one of my other favorite posters likes to say, before we can have a discussion of verbs and adjectives and participles, we first have to decide what a word is.

I have this vague notion that the functions that words serve in our modern languages have not been entirely persistent/consistent, i.e., limited to the strict familiar roles we ascribe to them today.

But it's late and I don't have any more time to post at the moment... Maybe more later.

-Tim
User avatar
tcward
Senior Lexiterian
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: The Old North State

Postby Brazilian dude » Sun May 01, 2005 10:35 am

BD, I do not doubt that somewhere in the world someone is using the word shoe as a verb

But shoe can indeed be a verb.

Brazilian dude
Languages rule!
Brazilian dude
Grand Panjandrum
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Botucatu - SP Brazil

Postby tcward » Sun May 01, 2005 11:38 pm

Obviously, posting at these late hours, which the necessities of the day seem to be limiting my free computer time to, is not a good idea.

But here I go anyway.

Yes, BD, 'shoe' is also a verb. However, we seem to have limited the verb form of 'shoe' to that of the animal kingdom, in general. How often have you heard people speaking of 'shoeing' themselves or someone else?

People 'put their shoes on'... They don't get 'shod' like horses.

As an aside, I think one of the reasons is that 'shoo' in English sounds the same and is completely unrelated.

But I think another reason is that 'to shoe' sounds like you're doing something a bit more enduring than merely getting dressed with a specific article of clothing.

Thus, my statement.

-Tim
User avatar
tcward
Senior Lexiterian
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: The Old North State

Postby KatyBr » Mon May 02, 2005 1:45 am

However, after I've put my shoes on I am then shod. Even tho' I don't *nail them on*

Katy
KatyBr
Senior Lexiterian
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:28 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Good Word Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests