“Of” used to say which specific thing belonging to a more general type you are referring to
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
"Of" can be used to describe the relationship between two close things, one thing being kind of an explanatory element. And gerund is frequently used. For example:
The idea of getting into the cave unnerved me.
The test of enduring heat as long as I can resulted in some major burns.
But if I apply this principle to certain sentences....
The irresponsibility of leaving the trash behind angered his boss.
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
This sounds stretched and kind of unnatural... But I'm not a native speaker, so I thought it better to ask you guys. Are they grammatically wrong? And if yes, why is that? And if no, is it possible to use this characteristic of "of" with every other nouns?
grammaticality sentence-structure prepositions
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 46 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
"Of" can be used to describe the relationship between two close things, one thing being kind of an explanatory element. And gerund is frequently used. For example:
The idea of getting into the cave unnerved me.
The test of enduring heat as long as I can resulted in some major burns.
But if I apply this principle to certain sentences....
The irresponsibility of leaving the trash behind angered his boss.
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
This sounds stretched and kind of unnatural... But I'm not a native speaker, so I thought it better to ask you guys. Are they grammatically wrong? And if yes, why is that? And if no, is it possible to use this characteristic of "of" with every other nouns?
grammaticality sentence-structure prepositions
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 46 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
1
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
"Of" can be used to describe the relationship between two close things, one thing being kind of an explanatory element. And gerund is frequently used. For example:
The idea of getting into the cave unnerved me.
The test of enduring heat as long as I can resulted in some major burns.
But if I apply this principle to certain sentences....
The irresponsibility of leaving the trash behind angered his boss.
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
This sounds stretched and kind of unnatural... But I'm not a native speaker, so I thought it better to ask you guys. Are they grammatically wrong? And if yes, why is that? And if no, is it possible to use this characteristic of "of" with every other nouns?
grammaticality sentence-structure prepositions
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
"Of" can be used to describe the relationship between two close things, one thing being kind of an explanatory element. And gerund is frequently used. For example:
The idea of getting into the cave unnerved me.
The test of enduring heat as long as I can resulted in some major burns.
But if I apply this principle to certain sentences....
The irresponsibility of leaving the trash behind angered his boss.
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
This sounds stretched and kind of unnatural... But I'm not a native speaker, so I thought it better to ask you guys. Are they grammatically wrong? And if yes, why is that? And if no, is it possible to use this characteristic of "of" with every other nouns?
grammaticality sentence-structure prepositions
grammaticality sentence-structure prepositions
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
edited Oct 29 '17 at 8:21
Sven Yargs
109k18234490
109k18234490
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
asked Oct 22 '15 at 1:09
maxmad
63
63
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 46 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 46 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
1
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53
|
show 3 more comments
1
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53
1
1
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53
|
show 3 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The part after "of" in your examples is not a mere specification, it's a subordinate clause which determines the subject of the main clause.
I would call them declarative sentences, but I see that Otto Jespersen calls them content clauses. It's irrelevant that in your examples the declarative is a noun phrase (with an indefinite verb), while that followed by a definite verb is more common. Perhaps some transformations can show this better.
Thinking that I would go into the cave unnerved me.
Can become:
The thought of going into the cave unnerved me.
And in the last two sentences you could do without the noun which is nominally the subject of the main sentence:
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
could just be
Running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
The term "content clause" ties well with this example: it's not the mere thinking that killed him, but the content of his (not) thinking, i.e. the act of running into the house (without thinking).
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The part after "of" in your examples is not a mere specification, it's a subordinate clause which determines the subject of the main clause.
I would call them declarative sentences, but I see that Otto Jespersen calls them content clauses. It's irrelevant that in your examples the declarative is a noun phrase (with an indefinite verb), while that followed by a definite verb is more common. Perhaps some transformations can show this better.
Thinking that I would go into the cave unnerved me.
Can become:
The thought of going into the cave unnerved me.
And in the last two sentences you could do without the noun which is nominally the subject of the main sentence:
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
could just be
Running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
The term "content clause" ties well with this example: it's not the mere thinking that killed him, but the content of his (not) thinking, i.e. the act of running into the house (without thinking).
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
The part after "of" in your examples is not a mere specification, it's a subordinate clause which determines the subject of the main clause.
I would call them declarative sentences, but I see that Otto Jespersen calls them content clauses. It's irrelevant that in your examples the declarative is a noun phrase (with an indefinite verb), while that followed by a definite verb is more common. Perhaps some transformations can show this better.
Thinking that I would go into the cave unnerved me.
Can become:
The thought of going into the cave unnerved me.
And in the last two sentences you could do without the noun which is nominally the subject of the main sentence:
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
could just be
Running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
The term "content clause" ties well with this example: it's not the mere thinking that killed him, but the content of his (not) thinking, i.e. the act of running into the house (without thinking).
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
The part after "of" in your examples is not a mere specification, it's a subordinate clause which determines the subject of the main clause.
I would call them declarative sentences, but I see that Otto Jespersen calls them content clauses. It's irrelevant that in your examples the declarative is a noun phrase (with an indefinite verb), while that followed by a definite verb is more common. Perhaps some transformations can show this better.
Thinking that I would go into the cave unnerved me.
Can become:
The thought of going into the cave unnerved me.
And in the last two sentences you could do without the noun which is nominally the subject of the main sentence:
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
could just be
Running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
The term "content clause" ties well with this example: it's not the mere thinking that killed him, but the content of his (not) thinking, i.e. the act of running into the house (without thinking).
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
The part after "of" in your examples is not a mere specification, it's a subordinate clause which determines the subject of the main clause.
I would call them declarative sentences, but I see that Otto Jespersen calls them content clauses. It's irrelevant that in your examples the declarative is a noun phrase (with an indefinite verb), while that followed by a definite verb is more common. Perhaps some transformations can show this better.
Thinking that I would go into the cave unnerved me.
Can become:
The thought of going into the cave unnerved me.
And in the last two sentences you could do without the noun which is nominally the subject of the main sentence:
The thoughtlessness of running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
could just be
Running into a ghost house resulted in his death.
The term "content clause" ties well with this example: it's not the mere thinking that killed him, but the content of his (not) thinking, i.e. the act of running into the house (without thinking).
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
answered Jan 1 '17 at 12:02
Nemo
3251316
3251316
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f281715%2fof-used-to-say-which-specific-thing-belonging-to-a-more-general-type-you-are-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
All of the subject noun phrases in your example sentences require a definite article: The idea, the test, etc. In the second sentence, why is it "as long as I can" if I is not otherwise mentioned? In the third sentence, trash is a mass noun and has to be singular. In the fourth, running into a ghost house is a strange verb phrase; it seems to refer to a Hallowe'en traffic accident.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:39
Does the second pair sound ungrammatical? Not to me (AmE), at least no less grammatical than the first pair. Can you use it with every other noun? Well, there is what is grammatical and what is customary. Rearranging the sentences into more conversational English: "I hate the irresponsibility of dog owners who don't pick up after their pets", "His death in the ghost house was the result of thoughtlessess."
– anongoodnurse
Oct 22 '15 at 1:40
As for the question itself, of is the most general relator possible in English. The possessive constructions can refer to any relationship whatsoever between noun phrases, including the relationship between a noun phrase and its complement.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:42
@John Lawler In the sentences above, is the complement gerund phrase or single word noun? It's quiet confusing for me.
– maxmad
Oct 22 '15 at 1:45
They're all gerunds. Two of them have direct objects (enduring heat and leaving the trash); only gerunds can have direct objects. And none of them can take an article -- *of the leaving the trash behind is ungrammatical. Gerunds can't take articles.
– John Lawler
Oct 22 '15 at 1:53