[Englisch] nachgestelltes Adjektiv
Christian Weisgerber
Es will mir einfach nicht aus dem Kopf...
Unter welchen Umstaenden werden im Englischen Adjektive (manchmal)
nachgestellt? Warum will ich "a man insane" schreiben? Komme mir niemand
mit "feststehende Begriffe", das mag einen Teil abdecken, aber nicht
alles.
Ich lese gerade einen Roman mit dem Titel _Raptor Red_, und wenn das
kein nachgestelltes Adjektiv ist, was dann? Wenn ein Palaentologe anno
1995 sowas in einen Buchtitel einbaut, dann ist das noch produktiv.
Sind das Ueberreste des franzoesischen Einflusses auf das Englische,
oder erklaert man das anders?
--
Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber na...@mips.pfalz.de
See another pointless homepage at <URL:http://home.pages.de/~naddy/>.
-- currently reading: Robert T. Bakker, Raptor Red --
Thomas Schenk
Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> =
> Es will mir einfach nicht aus dem Kopf...
> =
> Unter welchen Umstaenden werden im Englischen Adjektive (manchmal)
> nachgestellt? Warum will ich "a man insane" schreiben? Komme mir nieman=
d
> mit "feststehende Begriffe", das mag einen Teil abdecken, aber nicht
> alles.
See below.
> Ich lese gerade einen Roman mit dem Titel _Raptor Red_, und wenn das
> kein nachgestelltes Adjektiv ist, was dann? Wenn ein Palaentologe anno
> 1995 sowas in einen Buchtitel einbaut, dann ist das noch produktiv.
Strictly for rhetorical effect in this case.
> Sind das Ueberreste des franzoesischen Einflusses auf das Englische,
> oder erklaert man das anders?
No. Examples can be found in Old English.
There are three basic situations in which the adjective follows the noun
in English:
(1) Certain fixed phrases (in which the normal adjectival position would
sound very strange indeed):
attorney-general
body politic
court martial
fee-simple
heir apparent
notary public
poet laureate
postmaster-general
president elect
the village proper
(2) The adjective "just happens" to follow the noun:
"He glanced at her, his eyes impassive".
"...between matters past and matters future".
These are probably simple elliptical constructs, i.e., "He glanced
at her; his eyes (were) impassive".
(3) Word inversion for rhetorical effect. In such a case the aberrant
position of the adjective draws attention to itself, adding an
element of emphasis.
"...the goats live in light perpetual".
"...the Almighty cradled him in bliss eternal".
"Raptor Red".
The situation for the use of an inverted adjective-noun word order must
be appropriately determined, and this is unfortunately a part of English
"Sprachgef=FChl", not an insurmountable task. Otherwise, the risk of a
pretentious or pompous effect is all too real.
This little dissertation was plagiarized from an article found in
Burchfield's *The New Fowler's Modern English Usage*. Oxford University
Press (1996). My own opinions have been freely inserted, with apologies
to Professor Burchfield. I would recommend the book highly to any
foreign learner of the English language. It answers even the most
abstruse questions of modern English (and American) usage and grammar in
an easy-to-understand way. Earlier editions of Fowler's MEU (1926,
1965) were restricted to British usage. =
Gru=DF,
Tom =
-- =
***************** "But all thing which that shineth as the gold
Dr Thomas M. Schenk Ne is no gold as I have herd it told."
Laguna Beach, CA *The Chanonnes Yemannes Tale*
***************** Geoffrey Chaucer
Markus Kolbeck
tsc...@ix.netcom.com schrieb am 24.01.97
> There are three basic situations in which the adjective follows
> the noun in English:
[...]
Sehr informativ!
Darf ich, da es gerade um Wortstellung ging, eine weitere Frage
stellen?
Sehr oft wird englisches "only" nachgestellt, z.B. for personal
only.
Lassen sich hieraus Regeln ableiten, wann "only" nachgestellt
werden sollte und wann nicht?
--
Keep reading, Markus [http://www.lipsia.de/~markus/]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Wo ein Messer einmal tief ins Fleisch geschnitten hat,
tut die Beruehrung mit einer Feder weh. (Christa Wolf)
Thomas Schenk
> Sehr oft wird englisches "only" nachgestellt, z.B. for personal
> only.
>
> Lassen sich hieraus Regeln ableiten, wann "only" nachgestellt
> werden sollte und wann nicht?
>
highly controversial. "He only died last week", or, "He died only last
week." Both are commonly used with the same intended meaning. Precise
usage would require the second option, but most people would say the
first, putting the primary accentuation on the words, "last week." On
the
other hand, if you were to say: "He only injured one person", the
sentence could be construed to mean: "He injured (but nothing beyond
injury)
one person." The alternative possibility: "He injured only one person"
(...*one* person and no more). In spoken English there is little
likelihood of misunderstanding, because of intonation of word emphasis.
This is an oversimplification, but at least an introduction. The
problem of the position of *only* altering the meaning of a sentence has
been one that grammarians have been discussing since an essay was
written on the subject by Robert Lowth in 1762. It still isn't settled
to anyone's satisfaction.
The answer to your specific question is, however, a little simpler.
In the case of the example you gave, the construction would be
considered a "restrictive imperative" command, i.e., an order intended
to be observed by one class of persons, or restricting a certain
activity. In such cases *only* always follows the imperative verb:
"Right turn only!" (Road sign)
"Personnel only" (Sign on door)
"Pen only" (Instructions on a form)
"Fire only" (Sign over fire extinguisher); a more cordial
similar sign could just as often read: "Please use only in the
event of fire."
If you can imagine using "Achtung!", then *only* would probably go to
the end of the "Befehl". :-) I'm certain there are many exceptions, but
that is the simplest rule.
Tom
--
************************
Dr Thomas M Schenk
Laguna Beach, California