Grammar a more than five hundred year old castle

[hhg...@gmail.com]

Hi everybody.

I have a grammar question.

I know so far that
This castle is five hundred years old.
vs.
This is a five-hundred-year old castle.

But what about a castle that is more than five hundred years old?

It is a more-than-five-hundred-year-old castle.

It looks a bit weird. How is it written customarily?

[annily]

I agree it looks weird. I would just write "This castle is more than
five hundred years old".

[annily]

Although I'd probably write "500" instead of "five hundred".

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

It wouldn't customarily be written. One would write something like
"this castle is more than 500 years old". English doesn't forbid
constructing compound adjectives from three or more words, but it
doesn't encourage it either, at least in writing. Speech is another
matter, because in speech the tone of voice can guide the listener
through a statement that is complicated to parse.


--
athel

[erilar]

In article
<17079608.124.1330594726489.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbo9>,

That is correct, but very few hyphenate properly. If it bothers you,
put it into a subordinate clause as you do in the question.

--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2012-03-01 15:49:02 +0100, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> said:

> In article
> <17079608.124.1330594726489.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbo9>,
> "hhg...@gmail.com" <hhg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody.
>>
>> I have a grammar question.
>>
>> I know so far that
>> This castle is five hundred years old.
>> vs.
>> This is a five-hundred-year old castle.
>>
>> But what about a castle that is more than five hundred years old?
>>
>> It is a more-than-five-hundred-year-old castle.
>>
>> It looks a bit weird. How is it written customarily?
>
> That is correct, but very few hyphenate properly.

OK, but if I remember correctly your native language is German, so you
find quite normal the equivalent of "morethanfivehundredyearold" as an
adjective, but English frowns on that sort of thing, so I think it
should be rephrased even if it doesn't bother hhgygy.

> If it bothers you,
> put it into a subordinate clause as you do in the question.


--

athel

[erilar]

In article <9r9ja5...@mid.individual.net>,

No, German is my second language, but it's true that I rather enjoy the
long compounds 8-)

--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[Stan Brown]

On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 01:38:46 -0800 (PST), hhg...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Hi everybody.
>
> I have a grammar question.
>
> I know so far that
> This castle is five hundred years old.
> vs.
> This is a five-hundred-year old castle.

You're missing one hyphen: five-hundred-year-old. Multi-word
adjectives before the noun are hyphenated (though not everyone agrees
with that rule).

> But what about a castle that is more than five hundred years old?
>
> It is a more-than-five-hundred-year-old castle.
>
> It looks a bit weird. How is it written customarily?

It does indeed look weird, so I would not write that. Instead I'd
say "this castle is more than five centuries old."

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[Tom P]

In fact, despite the persistent myth, you would not write it all as one
word but as separate words. However, the German language does allow this
kind of interpolated adjectival clause, and the style is used a lot
particularly in the written language. So you find things like - "Der
letzte Woche im Disput um den inzwischen verworfenen Gesetzentwurf zur
Gesundheitsreform zurückgetretene Unterstaatssekretär hat ... " In
English you are obliged to use a subordinate clause - "The
undersecretary that resigned last week in a row over the now rejected
health reform has ... "
- which in turn creates another problem - the interpolated clause tells
us WHICH undersecretary is the subject of the sentence, whereas the
English version introduces the stylistic problem of whether to use
"that" or "who" as the relative pronoun.

[John Holmes]

And when we do use a long compund modifier like that, it is better to put it
after the noun. That is,
... a castle more than 500 years old ...
rather than
... a more than 500 years old castle ...

--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au

[Stan Brown]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:02:56 +1100, John Holmes wrote:
>
> And when we do use a long compund modifier like that, it is better to put it
> after the noun. That is,
> ... a castle more than 500 years old ...
> rather than
> ... a more than 500 years old castle ...

That's a good reminder. Better still, I think, to include some
linking words: "We went to see a castle that is more than 500 years
old."

I think /Time/ magazine pioneered the style of using compound
adjectives before the noun instead of phrases or clauses after the
noun. At least, by the 1950s it was being parodied for it "Balding,
thrice-married Ben Franklin. ..."

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2012-03-02 01:22:34 +0000, Stan Brown said:

> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 01:38:46 -0800 (PST), hhg...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Hi everybody.
>>
>> I have a grammar question.
>>
>> I know so far that
>> This castle is five hundred years old.
>> vs.
>> This is a five-hundred-year old castle.
>
> You're missing one hyphen: five-hundred-year-old. Multi-word
> adjectives before the noun are hyphenated (though not everyone agrees
> with that rule).
>
>> But what about a castle that is more than five hundred years old?
>>
>> It is a more-than-five-hundred-year-old castle.
>>
>> It looks a bit weird. How is it written customarily?
>
> It does indeed look weird, so I would not write that. Instead I'd
> say "this castle is more than five centuries old."

Yes. Without the hyphen it means a "five-hundred-year" castle that is
old. Then "five-hundred-year" wouldn't necessarily mean old, it could
(less plausibly) mean expected to last another 500 years -- like the
thousand-year Reich would be after the first 500 years. (Fortunately it
only managed a little more than 1% of its predicted life.)


--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2012-03-03 08:12:04 +0000, Stan Brown said:

> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:02:56 +1100, John Holmes wrote:
>>
>> And when we do use a long compund modifier like that, it is better to put it
>> after the noun. That is,
>> ... a castle more than 500 years old ...
>> rather than
>> ... a more than 500 years old castle ...
>
> That's a good reminder. Better still, I think, to include some
> linking words: "We went to see a castle that is more than 500 years
> old."
>
> I think /Time/ magazine pioneered the style of using compound
> adjectives before the noun instead of phrases or clauses after the
> noun. At least, by the 1950s it was being parodied for it "Balding,
> thrice-married Ben Franklin. ..."

Perhaps even earlier. This is dated by Arnold Zwicky at 1939: "Backward
ran sentences until reeled the mind". That is not of course an example
of a compound adjective, but it illustrates that as early as that
Timespeak was a subject of parody.


--
athel

[hhg...@gmail.com]

> OK, but if I remember correctly your native language is German, so you
> find quite normal the equivalent of "morethanfivehundredyearold" as an
> adjective, but English frowns on that sort of thing, so I think it
> should be rephrased even if it doesn't bother hhgygy.
>

Hungarian and German are alike in that respect though in this specifici case no such compound is possible in either language, I think