Is the phrase "A little more wiser" grammatically correct?

@Ragman,

Ragman: "A little more wiser" is improper grammar ... .

Please explain how it is "improper grammar".

Ragman: as well as illogical

Please explain how something you fully understand can be illogical. Isn't that in itself illogical, Ragman?

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman: a little more wise" (awkward usage because it's redundant but not ungrammatical).

You might as well explain how it's redundant.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman: Wiser already states the degree of wisdom and, as such, should not have a modifier.

In your "a little wiser" you have a modifier, just as you do in "much wiser".

1 Reply

@JTT,

You're either being disingenuous or ignorant. I don't know which or am I curious.

I'll reply only by supplying a link to comparative modifiers for those who are intellectually curious:
http://www.uottawa.ca/academic/arts/writcent/hypergrammar/compsupl.html

3 Replies

@JTT,

No, I don't like Shakespeare, but he has the disadvantage of using a language that hasn't been used for 400 years.

Quote:

HH: Do you think these would make a reader stumble?

Your quoting style makes me stumble, I never said that. Although I do agree.

No, you don't have to use the simplest vocabulary every time. It's about your audience and your purpose. In the this case the audience was an ESL student asking a question about common usage. That's why I explained my background. I write content for new students from all over the world about arcane library services and practices. Again, it colours my thinking.

Quote:

What of those situations where people know what was said but they don't know what was meant?

Well I don't think using a more complex vocabulary will make them a little more wiser. Wink

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Why aren't you going to explain how it is ungrammatical, Ragman?

Quote:

There are certain modifiers which you cannot logically use in the comparative and superlative forms. Adjectives like "perfect" and "unique," for instance, express absolute conditions and do not allow for degrees of comparison. Something cannot be more perfect than another thing: it is either perfect or not perfect.

Being that you are ignorant of the workings of language, Ragman, makes you unqualified to determine what is a good source or a bad one. Universities and colleges are loaded with folks describing the same old nonsense that has been doled out for centuries, such as the nonsense above.

You are so confused that you can't even focus on the actual issue.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman: I'll reply only by supplying a link ... .

When you really should be defending your silly notions.

::::::::::::::::

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=9363

"How does this idea get transmitted to the decision-makers that matter? English teachers are mostly English majors. They learn the analysis of literature, and virtually nothing about the analysis of grammar. (If they were educated after 1970 or so, they also learn a lot of theory that has much less to do with the analysis of grammar than what's going on at Computer Science does.)

Every English graduate should understand the English language, especially given how many will become not only teachers but editors, proofreaders, and other language-types. They all need at least one chunky course in English syntax. But my understanding is that this is optional, and not popular, among English department requirements."

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Ragman: those who are intellectually curious:
/////////

That certainly ain't you. You remain steadfast in wanting to maintain your ignorance.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Your link includes this passage:

Quote:

my suggestion would be to turn away from English departments, and pursue a plan based on an alliance of linguists with people in computer science, psychology, statistics, medicine, law, sociology, business, etc., who increasingly see linguistic analysis (e.g. in the form of "text mining" or "text analytics") as an interesting object of study in itself, and as a means to enable research on other (applied or fundamental) topics.

To think that is appropriate to display here, and brandished as "knowledge", is ludicrous.
It is academic navel-gazing. ACADEMIC LINGUIST HAVE EVIDENTLY FOUND THEMSELVES A LUCRATIVE NICHE, whoops CAPS LOCK, and are grimly peddling their useless wares somewhere far away from normal discourse. God only knows how they get funding for this, but they evidently do.

3 Replies

@McTag,

I fully understand that you have no interest in understanding language beyond the simplistic prescriptions that you were raised on, McTag. You've shown time and again that you are not willing to enter a zone where thinking becomes necessary. That's what makes your contributions less than useless after a certain point is reached.

This is evidenced by your predilection for inane tangents.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

I fully understand that

You fully understand **** all that is useful.

1 Reply

Wiserer.

Or even more wiserer.

I shall recommend it to my old english teacher snd see what he says.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Highly indicative of just how interested you are in using your brain, McTag. I described you and, true to form, you performed exactly as I predicted.

1 Reply

@Lordyaswas,

Lordy: I shall recommend it to my old english teacher snd see what he says.

I hope he isn't an English major like Contrex, Lordy. Given your contributions he can't be much or you slept your way thru school.

Anyway, the issue was addressed on page one.

"In conversation, adjectives are occasionally doubly marked for degree, carrying both inflectional and phraseology markers: ... ." (LGSWE)

0 Replies

@McTag,

Hi McTag, You're spot on! Communication is a skill that translates into being able to communicate ideas to others; no more, no less!

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Testament to your ignorance, CI. What you are suggesting is not what McTag believes. He believes in a bunch of silly prescriptions that he errantly believes guide our language use.

But you didn't know what else to say in your feeble attempt to pile on.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Highly indicative of just how interested you are

I've given you enough indicators as to my opinion of your antics to need to repeat myself. You'd sooner preen and posture and denigrate the work of others than advance anything useful. The bulk of your output is carping, and personal attacks.
Knowledge is useless without commonsense, and your appears in addition to be warped.

1 Reply

@McTag,

All you give are opinions, McTag, and many are simple repeats of the garbage that your parents and style manuals have put into your head. The result - garbage in garbage out.

1 Reply

@McTag,

McTag: To think that is appropriate to display here, and brandished as "knowledge", is ludicrous.
---------

McTag the hypocrite carping.

0 Replies

@JTT,

You heard it here first, folks: some people have things in their heads that their parents taught them.

How lucky we are to have JTT putting all that straight.

1 Reply

Is the phrase "A little more wiser" grammatically correct?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know