@DamkerngT. yes it looks like an adjective. But it indeed is a determinative. It's a quantifier in its function. There are reasons why I don't consider it an adjective. First, an adverb can't modify it. Second, unlike adjectives it takes part in partitive construction. It's Post-determiner (in Quirk et al terminology). It's obviously not a noun either. No adjective can modify it.
Of course adjectives can take part in partitive construction, but the adjectives are in superlative or comparitive form.
It might be clearer if you look at my other answer.
Six women were there.
So what word category does six fall into in this sentence? It's determinative, plain and simple and nothing else in this particular sentence. And this determinative functions as a determiner or, if you prefer, a quantifier here. But the word falls into determinative cat...
As far as I can say about your whole book sentence is it's a NP. And whole is a quantifier (function). But it is not determining which book he read. So I think because of this reason we need another determiner before whole.
@Man_From_India I think you missed the point. It's true that that/those may be permissible in front of one/two/... as well as whole, but the point was a/the is indispensable in front of whole.
I think we need to consider it in some other way. Because if we say it is an adjective, it would create some problem too. Let's check if we have any other old similar questions.
I quickly browsed the pages pf student version of CaGEL, and I think the authors don't analyze DP structure the way Quirk et al did.
@DamkerngT. I think in two whole books , [whole books] is a nominal, and the determinative two are external modifier, that modifies the whole nominal - whole book. If we analyze it this way our problem is solved I think. We can still think of whole as a determinative.
An example from the book - twice the amount. Here twice is external modifier.
I need to read the main volume more for better understanding.
Because I have some questions too after reading that book. What is twice in twice the amonut. It says it's a quantifier. But I think quantifier is a function. Not a parts of speech or word class. I need to read a bit carefully from some previous sections for better understanding. So till then let this discussion postpone. Let me know if you too find something interesting.
@DamkerngT. You are right all along. whole indeed is an adjective, acts like a quantifier. If possible please remove my other comments where I passed on wrong info.
I don't know if I was right. I just thought that it's odd to say that it's a determiner.
@Man_From_India BTW, which comments do you want me to remove?
(Personally, I don't think we should remove any discussions in the past, even when we were not 100% technically correct. It's just the nature of discussion.)
> Solar power costs had hit a low of Rs 3.30 per unit last month, which is equal to average generation tariffs of NTPCBSE -0.76 %, which produces bulk of its power from coal.
Read more at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/57565592.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
Solar power in India now costs the same as power produced by coal
Analysis paralysis or paralysis of analysis is the state of over-analyzing (or over-thinking) a situation so that a decision or action is never taken, in effect paralyzing the outcome.
> Why does the word "significant" in the phrase "statistically significant" mean something so different from other uses of the word? Interestingly, this is because the meaning of "significant" in everyday language has changed. It turns out that when the procedures for hypothesis testing were developed, something was "significant" if it signified something.
> Thus, finding that an effect is statistically significant signifies that the effect is real and not due to chance. Over the years, the meaning of "significant" changed, leading to the potential misinterpretation.
I'm reading up on statistics, and google for different terms now and then. I've learned to avoid Wikipedia like the fire. When there's no oversight over article writing, the articles come up a horrible mess.
Can/could, present and past tense, no IF clause or whether or other idea.
How could I have done* that? is the past tense of: How can I do that?
How can you say she is rich [right now, present]? How could you say she was rich [yesterday]? Or: How could you have said she was rich?
Summary: prese...
This answer makes me want to review the definition of tense.
At first glance, that construct seems to be something of a lament, rather than an everyday sentence. Like "You threw away that vase - it was my favourite. How could you!!"
It almost has an implied "Shame on you!" tacked on at the end.
But let's take a closer look at the "could" + present tense construct.
I think the "how could you say" has a little of the flavour of the "did" + present tense thing. (I'm not a linguist - please excuse the informal terminology.)
To shift it (further?) back, you'd need "how could you have said".
Then we have "you could do it", which seems to be a whole 'nother kettle of fish.
@DamkerngT. That's why I used the term "continued assertion". Here, "say" has the sense that someone not just speaks the thing, they also believe it. The belief / assertion continues to the present.
I'm not sure why the past tense sounds right with irrealis moods, but in realis moods, I think tenses tend to have some bearing on time. However, you also need to factor in the notional reference time ('now'). Once you do that, time and tense tend to track together better.
I'm guessing any site that offers proofreading from a community of volunteer native speakers (i.e. is free, which is what people coming here want) is going to be volatile and eventually disappear. I say this for the same proofreading is off-topic here: it's a lot of work, not particularly rewarding, and only ever helps one single person. Which means there's not a lot in it for the volunteers, which means they're not incentivized to stick around. So my take (being of the curmudgeonly ELU sort) is the Meta post simply say proofreading is not offered. — Dan Bronyesterday
Six women were there.
So what word category does six fall into in this sentence? It's determinative, plain and simple and nothing else in this particular sentence. And this determinative functions as a determiner or, if you prefer, a quantifier here. But the word falls into determinative cat...
Can/could, present and past tense, no IF clause or whether or other idea.
How could I have done* that? is the past tense of: How can I do that?
How can you say she is rich [right now, present]? How could you say she was rich [yesterday]? Or: How could you have said she was rich?
Summary: prese...
Language Overflow
Language Overflow