Help! I'm trapped inside a large, red, fluffy sweater!
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
As I was lay awake this morning
In terms of two people speaking to each other... The real value is in the word 'trapped'. The rest provides only limited value in the context to the other person. After all for example if it was small versus large would that really change anything? But if I was the other person I would be more curious as to why you were laying in bed wearing a sweater like that in the first place. And if you were not in fact wearing it then why were you thinking about it in the first place.
I'm guessing you've never lain awake in the morning. Hmm?
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
As a native English speaker, I've never consciously thought about the order of adjectives, but your observation is interesting. It seems like there's a natural inclination to say "fluffy, red sweater" rather than "red, fluffy sweater" when both size and color are specified. Theorder might indeed follow an unspoken rule, at least in common usage.
Reflecting on it, I'd say both could be correct, but there might be a subtle nuance to consider. Perhaps the order could be influenced by emphasis or personal preference. I'd be curious to hear the perspectives of those who learned English as a second language—whether there's a formal rule in their teaching or if it's something they've intuited through experience. Language can be wonderfully flexible, and these nuances add to its richness!
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
Whatever order sounds most like a band name is correct.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
-
Whatever order sounds most like a band name is correct.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
Oddly enough, I had Soft, White Underbelly on my mind yesterday. :thumbsup:
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
I'm trapped inside a large, red, fluffy sweater ...
On a cold, dark, winter evening, with my soft, furry, ginger cat 😺 on my lap.
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
I'm trapped inside a large, red, fluffy sweater ...
On a cold, dark, winter evening, with my soft, furry, ginger cat 😺 on my lap.
(Kneazle.)
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
I think it depends on what the word "fluffy" is describing. If it's related to material, then it's a large red fluffy sweater. It's made of something fluffy, but it could be wool, cotton, nylon, etc. It could also simply be referring the class of objects known as "fluffy sweaters".
I've got a large red fluffy sweater and a small green fluffy sweater.
In this case, dropping the "large", I could still say "a red fluffy sweater"! If it's the shape, then it's a large fluffy red sweater.
I've got a large fluffy red sweater and a small furry green sweater.
If it's opinion, then it's a fluffy large red sweater. This use would indicate the speaker is emphasizing the fluffiness.
"Is this a nice large red sweater?" "Well, it's definitely a fluffy large red sweater!"
Of course, rules are made to be broken, so the size-color order can be overridden if you're specifically referring to "large sweaters".
I've several large sweaters, but my green large sweater is being washed, so I'll wear my fluffy red large sweater.
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
-
Did that sound right to you? It does to me. As a native (U.S.) English speaker, I was of course not taught that there is a rule guideline to how we order adjectives -- but ESL students are taught a rule. As I was lay awake this morning I thought about this. I think the above is in accordance with the rule. But what if I drop the "large" -- I would describe it as a "fluffy, red sweater" rather than a "red, fluffy sweater". I know there are many highly fluent non-native English speakers in the room -- what does your experience tell you? Can both be "correct"? Is there a nuance to the rule which swaps these? If both size and color are specified, do they gravitate together? (And don't get me started on separating adjectives with COMMAs.)
At least you are keeping the indefinite article. Leaving out definite or indefinite article from sentences gets my goat :laugh:
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
At least you are keeping the indefinite article. Leaving out definite or indefinite article from sentences gets my goat :laugh:
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
It's definitely an article of clothing.
-
It's definitely an article of clothing.
I think that would be "indefinitely".
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
I think that would be "indefinitely".
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
For an indefinite period, sure. Maybe only until the asteroid hits.
-
I'm guessing you've never lain awake in the morning. Hmm?
