Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

@Ionus,

You don't understand English grammar because you're not talking grammar. You're describing an opinion, a prescription and these don't describe how language works.

Quote:

Much is qualitative....more is quantifying . Putting them together is pointless . It is the same, or more, or most . What is the point of saying it is a better quality quantity ?

I don't have much time. 'much' is qualitative?

He doesn't have much money. 'much' is qualitative?

He has much money. 'much' is qualitative?

Here's just one dictionary entry from AHD. In each of its forms, 'much' is described as clearly quantitative. I've underlined the pertinent sections so all you have to do is get someone to read them to you.

Quote:

AHD

much

ADJECTIVE:
more (môr, mr) KEY , most (mst) KEY
Great in quantity, degree, or extent: not much rain; much affection.
NOUN:
A large quantity or amount: Much has been written.
Something great or remarkable: The campus wasn't much to look at.
ADVERB:
more, most
To a great degree or extent: much smarter.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/much

My good dog but you are a doofus, Ionus. Provide your sources that support your contention. [yeah right, when pigs fly]

Quote:

You show 42,900 hits for "that that" to prove you are right....I show 45,400,000 hits for bad english and you dont see the connection ? Thats rather sad .....

Tell me the connection.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

You're describing an opinion, a prescription and these don't describe how language works.

You dummy . That is exactly how language works .

Why did your only examples use much as an adjective ? Havent you learnt adverbs yet ? Even the definition provided by you for much as an adjective and adverb includes "degree or extent" . Are these qualitative or do I have to explain this too ?

The nature of "much more", if you are correct, is saying "most more" or "more more" and as you are still working on "that that" I suppose it makes sense to you .

Much is a non-descript word and you are far better off using real descriptions . Isn't there a government English learning program you can enroll in ?

"That that" is poor English and can easily be replaced by proper sentence structure . Quoting a newspaper for a ref on the English language is bizarre even by your standards . Do you even read them ? Are you sure they are written in faultless English ?

How did you go with the use of capitals ? Still puzzled how a one word sentence/answer is justified in using capitals ? What is your native language anyway ?

2 Replies

@Ionus,

I'm siding with JTT on this stuff Io.

If someone had won a drinking competition by laying out his competitors on the floor while he was still upright any claim he made to be able to drink "more" would be futile because "more" might mean one drop more. Which is banal. If he wanted to strut his stuff he wouldn't be impressive with "more" as one drop. "Much more" is obviously a necessity in such circumstances.

And that example was chosen in order avoid indecency.

A politician saying that more needs to be done would get laughed at. Even if he said "much more" I would laugh. When our banks were bailed out by our frightened governments do you really think "more" money was sufficient. $1 is more. A few dozen $trillion is not in the frame.

If you were negotiating with a lady of the upper hand do you think adding a cent to your first offer, which is more, would satisfy her demand for "much more"?

It's obvious you are not a labour union official.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I'm siding with JTT on this stuff Io.

Thats acceptable to me spendi . This isnt personal, its a language .

Quote:

"Much more" is obviously a necessity in such circumstances.

It is always better to speak of specifics . How much more is much more ? One glass ? One keg ? 10 times ? 100 times ? More tells you which is the greater . Much more tells you nothing unless you know how much is much .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Another six pints would fit the bill I think. Your other examples would require "a whole lot more" and soon become absurd.

Language is a system of communication and "more" communicates very little.

In Indecent Proposal the lady was not being offered more than she had previously earned. She was offered much more.

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendi, If more communicates very little, why do you insist on writing many paragraphs when one will do?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

That is exactly how language works .

That reveals just how little you know about language. People have never listened to the type of ignorance you spout precisely because you are spouting an opinion, a much more ignorant opinion than I ever expected to hear even from someone as ignorant as you.

Quote:

Why did your only examples use much as an adjective ?

Why would it matter? You didn't specify that adjectives were excluded from your little "rule".

Quote:

Havent you learnt adverbs yet ? Even the definition provided by you for much as an adjective and adverb includes "degree or extent" . Are these qualitative or do I have to explain this too ?

You are so confused that you haven't explained anything yet.

Quote:

Much is a non-descript word and you are far better off using real descriptions .

Now you're qualifying your little "rule" into a style choice. Talk about confused! Where are your sources that describe this "rule", or are you now changing your contention that it's really only a style choice?

Quote:

"That that" is poor English and can easily be replaced by proper sentence structure .

You're like the ball in a pinball machine.

I showed you an example where it couldn't be changed. You always ignore the things that illustrate how poorly informed you are.

Provide sources for your errant contention.

Quote:

Quoting a newspaper for a ref on the English language is bizarre even by your standards .

It just so happens that The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, by far the premier corpus study of the English language, quotes extensively from newspapers because that is one of the easily identifiable registers of the English language.

Quote:

Do you even read them ?

Now you are really reaching. But that's how it goes when you have nothing.

Quote:

Are you sure they are written in faultless English ?

Again, you are reaching, creating red herrings and mindless tangents because you are, predictably, unable to address the examples I so generously provided to try to lift you from your appalling level of ignorance.

You still haven't explained what you were asked to explain. Why is it that you have so much trouble with your own concepts and ideas?

Quote:

How did you go with the use of capitals ? Still puzzled how a one word sentence/answer is justified in using capitals ?

Forget these inanities and focus, lad.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

It is always better to speak of specifics .

The "rule" gets further qualified. Now it's just a question of style, or "logic" but you can't keep it straight which.

Your question,

How much more is much more ?

is hereby disqualified. It's not specific.

Quote:

Much more tells you nothing unless you know how much is much .

So if you know in advance how 'much more', then you can use 'much more'. Why didn't you explain at the outset all the little sub-rules that your "rule" has?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Quote:
Quote:
You're describing an opinion, a prescription and these don't describe how language works.
That is exactly how language works .
That reveals just how little you know about language.

Do you really think when you say a word it is not your opinion of what that word means ? Perhaps your thought processes are being controlled.....North Korea was big on that wasnt it ?

Quote:

People have never listened to the type of ignorance you spout

Now you have access to surveys.....care to name them ?

Quote:

Quote:
Why did your only examples use much as an adjective ?
Why would it matter?

Because if you had of used it as an adverb or noun your stupidity would be obvious even to you .

Quote:

Quote:
Havent you learnt adverbs yet ? Even the definition provided by you for much as an adjective and adverb includes "degree or extent" . Are these qualitative or do I have to explain this too ?
You are so confused that you haven't explained anything yet.

Perhaps we have reached the limit of your ability to learn at your age .

Quote:

Now you're qualifying your little "rule" into a style choice.

Can you think of any rules that arent a style choice ? It is just that your choice involves no style . Perhaps people have been arrested for poor grammar and spelling.....that goes some way to explaining the prison population in the USA .

Quote:

I showed you an example where it couldn't be changed.

It is impossible ? I asked you to explain why you thought that sentence needed "that that" and you couldnt . But now it is essential...what does that that say about you ?

Quote:

It just so happens that The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, by far the premier corpus study of the English language, quotes extensively from newspapers because that is one of the easily identifiable registers of the English language.

Again, you understand nothing . I dont know if they would be happy having you associate yourself with them . They are looking for modern changes, not citing authority . If languages dont change, they die . Something the French could learn .

Quote:

I so generously provided

Yes, we have seen your generous nature towards soldiers .

Capitals, "that that", "much more"......perhaps we should start again by you telling me what you do understand .

1 Reply

@JTT,

These rules that baffle you are directly related to intelligence . Therein lies your problem . You can attempt to communicate in any way you like, and I am sure you do attempt, but

Quote:

Quote:
How much more is much more ?
is hereby disqualified. It's not specific.

Well I am glad you finally saw the light on that that one .

Quote:

So if you know in advance how 'much more', then you can use 'much more'. Why didn't you explain at the outset all the little sub-rules that your "rule" has?

I guess you didnt see the light . Or you are just pretending to be stupid (I hope) . Can you tell me how much more is much more ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Because if you had of used it as an adverb or noun your stupidity would be obvious even to you .

The irony, which will, no doubt, be completely lost on you, Ionus, is delicious.

Why have you opted for the indirect 'would' when you think that everyone who uses language should/must always be specific?

Forgetting the irony, why is it that you have so much trouble, much more trouble than the average person, providing examples?

Quote:

Now you have access to surveys.....care to name them ?

I already did. Odd that a sharp guy like you missed it. I also pointed out just how extensive this use is in English, as did Spendius, something that you are being quite careful to avoid acknowledging or discussing.

You could of, oops, have saved everyone a lot of time if you had just provided a source that confirms your "rule", opinion, "advice".

We're not even sure what it is or where the hell it came from as the "rule" changes from post to post, so provide a source that can explain what you're trying to get at without the massive confusion that you are obviously going through.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I do think you have a very good point but if I am not mistaken even you find that Spendius's style to be very amusing!

I do think Spendius adds value to the subject!

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Language is a system of communication and "more" communicates very little.

It communicates the greater of two, but not by what quantity . In an attempt to fix that, the language has come up with "much more" which indicates a greater difference then more but still suffers from the same problem of by what quantity . In short, it solves nothing whilst adding another word .

And dont get me started on people who use absolutely and say things like "have a Very Wonderful Merry Christmas" . Superlative superlatives . Do they think drugs will be involved ? Advertising is doing extraordinarily excessive absolute total destruction to superlatives .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Can you tell me how much more is much more ?

You're not even aware of just how ignorant you are. You've just used 'much more', TWICE, in a perfectly grammatical, natural fashion.

'much more' is a great deal more than more.

'much more' is considerably more than more.

'much more' is oodles more than more.

'much more' is tons more than more.

2 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

You're not even aware of just how ignorant you are.

Gee, I didnt think you would say that ....

Quote:

You've just used 'much more', TWICE, in a perfectly grammatical, natural fashion.

You mean in a fashion that contributed nothing .

Quote:

a great deal more than more.....considerably more than more.......oodles more than more......tons more than more.

Which is what quantity ? Does much mean twice to some people and thrice to others ? Do you know how greater much more is to more ? Isnt more also an accurate description of much more ?

3 Replies

@Ionus,

I do agree that as long as we know what someone is relating to, little information can often be enough to understand their point of view!

Even though this is grossly misspelled does your brain somewhat able you to easily understand what is written?

I cnduo't bvleiee taht I culod aulaclty uesdtannrd waht I was rdnaieg. Unisg the icndeblire pweor of the hmuan mnid, aocdcrnig to rseecrah at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mttaer in waht oderr the lterets in a wrod are, the olny irpoamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rhgit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whoutit a pboerlm. Tihs is bucseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey ltteer by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Aaznmig, huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghhuot slelinpg was ipmorantt! See if yuor fdreins can raed tihs too.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Gee, I didnt think you would say that ....

When you are so earnest in exhibiting your ignorance so far and so wide, someone has to be honest with you.

"Gee, I didnt[sic] think ... "

That's not specific. Collocations that aren't specific are, according to an ignorant asshole, [are there assholes? you still haven't provided any source] banned from English.

Quote:

I wrote: You've just used 'much more', TWICE, in a perfectly grammatical, natural fashion.

Quote:

You mean in a fashion that contributed nothing .

On the contrary. I couldn't have replied if you hadn't used them because, [why does this have to be explained to Ionus?] the meaning that you wanted to express wouldn't have been there.

1 Reply

Well, it certainly sounds like everything is peachy in the Middle East.

1 Reply

@roger,

No fuzz this year only nectarines!

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

Which is what quantity ? Does much mean twice to some people and thrice to others ? Do you know how greater much more is to more ?

Are you seriously trying to suggest that every word/phrase/collocation we use in English needs to be specific?

Are you also suggesting that if a word/phrase/collocation isn't specific, it is incorrect, ungrammatical, unnatural?

What is the quantity described by 'more'? As it doesn't follow your "rule" demanding specificity, it must either not exist in English or it's incorrect or it's bad.

Quote:

Isnt[sic] more also an accurate description of much more ?

No, it most certainly is not. Spendius told you that and explained it with many examples.

I gave you synonyms for 'much' in 'much more'. Do you deny they exist? Do you suggest that they don't have meanings similar to 'much more'?

Are you trying to tell us that those similar meanings I gave are also banned under the bizarre "rule" you've concocted?

1 Reply

Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know