Reply
Thu 11 Jun, 2015 08:27 am
I'm hoping I can get help identifying a distinction in adjectives: those that pertain directly to the noun they modify, vs. those that describe the effect of the noun on something or somebody else.
Some examples:
in "A lucky man," the man himself is lucky. In "A lucky break," the break is lucky not to itself (as it were), but lucky to a person.
In "A proud mother," the mother herself is proud. In "a proud victory," the victory isn't itself proud (as it were), rather somebody is proud of it.
What I'm looking for is an easy way to capture this distinction between an adjective that directly (as it were) modifies its noun and one that describes how somebody else views or experiences it.
Would you call the former "intransitive adjectives" and the latter "transitive adjectives" (because their description implicitly fits not the mentioned noun but implicitly something/somebody else)?
Thanks!
@Ted Dinard,
In your second distiction, the adjectives do not describe the effect of the noun on something or somebody else, they simply describe the noun that they are modifying. Those are attributes of those nouns. It doesn't take something or someone for a break to be described lucky or a victory to be described proud. Those are descriptions of those nouns in and of the nouns.
@InfraBlue,
Thanks InfraBlue. I think I see what you're saying.
Would it be correct to say that you're contending it's not so much a matter of classifying kinds of adjectives but rather the definition of words?
What I mean is this. In the examples using "proud," we should simply say "proud" has two meanings: 1) having the emotion pride; and 2) causing the emotion pride.
Of course, you can't say a victory literally has the emotion pride but it could cause it.
@Ted Dinard,
Yes, I think you can think of it that way.
The American Heritage Dictionary has it as, "occasioning or being a reason for pride."
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace