0
   

"Fun" as an adjective

 
 
Clary
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Dec, 2003 04:35 pm
McTag wrote:


Good point. I think used like that, it is an adjective. Gosh. But I would never write "a fun party", and I cannot exactly say why. Maybe just usage.


But my sons use it, and they are not uneducated just young - it is the American influence I think. They also use 'he was like' instead of 'he said'. Odd.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Dec, 2003 04:47 pm
On the other hand, it may still be a noun:

That party was fun
The Lord is King
One mistake could be sudden death

Eh?
0 Replies
 
Clary
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 04:29 am
Yep, it could. I think it comes down to the definitions we use for adjectives and nouns. Locked into Latin grammar with a non-Latin language. If it can't be compared or modified, it probably should be classified a noun - though someone earlier in this thread said they'd heard funner! You may be able to get junker food than McD's (or probably not) but only as a nonce word, I imagine.
0 Replies
 
Clary
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 04:33 am
You can say 'His party was more fun than mine' but not the Lord is more king than Charles I.
And sudden death is a noun phrase - although you could say, I suppose, that falling off a high cliff could be A more sudden death than eating at McDs every day.

I must get back to writing the grammar books that is my work!
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 09:44 am
And

The party was fun
The party was great fun
The party was a lot of fun

Nouns, I think.
0 Replies
 
Clary
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 10:58 am
Yes.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 12:03 pm
We need to bear in mind the difference between spoken and written language, and how formal the context is. I could certainly say, "The party was fun" and even "We had a fun time." But I also say "ain't" when it suits me.

Wouldn't use that language in a formal written communication, though...
0 Replies
 
Clary
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 01:23 pm
Too right D'Artagnan, mon brave mousquetier - but it's interesting how posts here, and emails, are bridging the gap between spoken and written.. I have a (pedantic) friend who distinguishes between letters, which he may send by email, and emails, which aren't the same thing at all. Hmmm. And we have Smile but I suppose people always did drawings in the margins of letters.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Dec, 2003 01:42 pm
Agreed, Clary. I may be on the same wave length as that friend of yours; I have a friend with whom I've corresponded for years (mainly via snail mail), and we've evolved our own protocols re appropriate language...
0 Replies
 
gozmo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Dec, 2003 07:35 am
fun, funner, funnest makes me sick, sicker sickest. I will never accept it and where I read it I will read no more.
0 Replies
 
Rounin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Dec, 2003 07:52 am
Well, as I said in the "funner" thread, grammar changes over time. Nouns frequently turn into adjectives, adjectives turn into nouns, and simple grammatical rules such as the "-er/-est"-ending to adjectives find new uses over time.

If the word "fun" itself survive itself, we might see "funner" as a natural part of the English language in 20-40 years, and people might get sickest from seeing it as a noun instead.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Dec, 2003 05:46 pm
Funner and funnest are sloppy - they should be more and most fun. But I have no problem with "the party was fun" or "the fun party" or "the party was so fun" just as I have no problem with split infinitives. English teachers need to get with the picture...
0 Replies
 
Rounin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Dec, 2003 08:40 pm
Sloppiness is often what drives the language forward. Why should one see it as especially noble that one's language is unneccessarily complicated? That's just so unfunnest.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Dec, 2003 10:29 pm
Even if unfunnest was a word, that's grammatically incorrect - by the current rules, I suppose.
0 Replies
 
Rounin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Dec, 2003 10:26 am
Even if unfunniest were a word.

Owned.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Dec, 2003 10:46 am
Anyone can say or write whatever he or she wants. And, I suppose, if you want to predict what will be acceptable grammar 50 or 500 years from now, that's OK, too.

It would be a bit like driving your car 100 mph, then telling the cop who pulls you over that it's OK, in 50 years, 100 will be the speed limit. I doubt he'll buy that argument, but it's worth a try...
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Dec, 2003 10:58 am
Hee hee hee

I don't think it's sloppiness which drives change, exactly, though no doubt it plays a part; I think it's more to do with desire for brevity and simplicity.
(Although Americans say "momentarily" when they mean currently, and "at this time" when they mean now, so who knows. Smile
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Dec, 2003 06:21 pm
The thing about langauge, is, if you use a nonstandard word when talking to your friends, your English teacher isn't going to show up to your house and bill you. Or, maybe you're did...
0 Replies
 
Wy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Dec, 2003 08:21 pm
Nonstandard when I'm "at home" is differnt from how I communicate to strangers... frinstance, I don't object (too much) to typos in casual emails, but I would object mightily to mistakes in a business letter...

But I will never, and I exhort others to never, use "funner" or "funnest". Ever.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 01:54:42