Elementary question regarding "much more than..." and "is more of..."
Yongjik
I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
less the same thing:
"Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan)
"Science is more of a body of knowledge than all else." (a
"paraphrase" by the poster)
I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native speaker
with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
So.... what do you guys think?
* Also, I think the "of" in the second sentence should really be
"about", but I'm less certain about that. (After all I'm not a native
speaker.) Am I correct?
Thanks,
- Yongjik Kim
tony cooper
wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
>bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
>less the same thing:
>
>"Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
>knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan)
>"Science is more of a body of knowledge than all else." (a
>"paraphrase" by the poster)
>
>I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
>And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native speaker
>with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
>
>So.... what do you guys think?
I think the second statement is the opposite of the first sentence.
It seems someone is disagreeing with Sagan rather than paraphrasing
him.
>* Also, I think the "of" in the second sentence should really be
>"about", but I'm less certain about that. (After all I'm not a native
>speaker.) Am I correct?
I'd stick with "of". "Of" is used to say that science is a body of
knowledge. "About" would be used to say that science pertains to a
body of knowledge. "Of" can be dropped from the sentence and it still
says the same thing. Probably better.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Hi all,
>
> I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
> bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
> less the same thing:
>
> "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
> knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan)
> "Science is more of a body of knowledge than all else." (a
> "paraphrase" by the poster)
>
> I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
> And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native speaker
> with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
>
> So.... what do you guys think?
Assuming that his "of" is wrong (see below), you're right, and he's
wrong. Sagan's quote says that science is less a body of knowledge
than it is a way of thinking, so it can't be more a body of knowledge
than it is anything else.
> * Also, I think the "of" in the second sentence should really be
> "about", but I'm less certain about that. (After all I'm not a native
> speaker.) Am I correct?
No. The preposition should simply not be there if the intention is to
parallel the quote. The sentences say what science *is*. With "of"
it says that science is a bigger body of knowledge than everything
else put together. With "about" it would be something like that
science is more concerned with a (particular) body of knowledge than
anything else is.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |It does me no injury for my neighbor
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to say there are twenty gods, or no
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |God.
| Thomas Jefferson
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
James Hogg
> Hi all,
>
> I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a
> non-English bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences
> mean more or less the same thing:
>
> "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
> knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan) "Science is more of a body of
> knowledge than all else." (a "paraphrase" by the poster)
>
> I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact
> opposite. And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native
> speaker with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
He rewrote the sentence to make it say the opposite of what Sagan said.
His Ph.D. friend may have been (a) drunk, (b), not paying attention, or
(c) non-existent.
> So.... what do you guys think?
>
> * Also, I think the "of" in the second sentence should really be
> "about", but I'm less certain about that. (After all I'm not a
> native speaker.) Am I correct?
Why bother unnecessarily changing a preposition in a sentence that you
think is fundamentally wrong?
--
James
Tasha Miller
> Hi all,
>
> I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
> bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
> less the same thing:
>
> "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
> knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan)
> "Science is more of a body of knowledge than all else." (a
> "paraphrase" by the poster)
>
> I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
> And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native speaker
> with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
>
> So.... what do you guys think?
Well, at least you were insulting and right!
>
> * Also, I think the "of" in the second sentence should really be
> "about", but I'm less certain about that. (After all I'm not a native
> speaker.) Am I correct?
No. I won't use the correct terminology here because I'm the non-erudite
kind of native speaker but "body of x" is a familiar phrase in English.
"Body of water", body of lies", "body of work" and "body of evidence" are
other examples. "Body of knowledge" is instantly recognisable to me as
being apt in the context.
James Hogg
I'm sure the question concerned the first "of" in "Science is more of a
body of knowledge", and whether that should be "Science is more about a
body of knowledge".
--
James
Athel Cornish-Bowden
> Yongjik wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
>> bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
>> less the same thing:
>>
>> "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
>> knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan) "Science is more of a body of
>> knowledge than all else." (a "paraphrase" by the poster)
>>
>> I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
>> And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native
>> speaker with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
>
> He rewrote the sentence to make it say the opposite of what Sagan said.
> His Ph.D. friend may have been (a) drunk, (b), not paying attention, or
> (c) non-existent.
I'd put my money on (c).
--
athel
Tasha Miller
Oops, on my first careless reading I took that "second" as referring to the
"of" and not the sentence. Thanks!
(About isn't preferable to the first "of", either.)
Frank ess
I'll offer (d) recipient of a "team degree" acquired without much
investment of learning, earned by dint of personality (ingratiating or
bullying; I've known both types).
--
Frank ess
John Varela
> Hi all,
>
> I know this sounds stupid, but I just caught someone (in a non-English
> bulletin board) arguing that the following two sentences mean more or
> less the same thing:
>
> "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of
> knowledge." (quote from Carl Sagan)
> "Science is more of a body of knowledge than all else." (a
> "paraphrase" by the poster)
>
> I called BS and said that they in fact mean almost the exact opposite.
> And then he insults me, saying he verified it with a native speaker
> with PhD. (Well, to be fair, I also insulted him...)
>
> So.... what do you guys think?
I think "than all else" in the second sentence is borderline
nonsense.
To the extent that it makes any sense, I agree with everyone else
that the second sentence says the opposite of the first.
--
John Varela
Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email