I just spent 20 minutes reading various Wikipedia articles on grammar.

My head hurts now.

All I was trying to figure out is why there's no such word as "sheeps". 
Several other words have this property, but I have no idea what it's called.

Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
"transparency"? [Aside from also happening to be a noun. God English is 
complicated!]

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
> "transparency"? [Aside from also happening to be a noun. God English is 
> complicated!]

It's only a noun (you can tell by how it's used in sentences). 
Specifically, it is a quality of materials that allows light to pass 
through them ;)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> All I was trying to figure out is why there's no such word as "sheeps". 
> Several other words have this property, but I have no idea what it's 
> called.

If the plural of mouse is mice and louse is lice, shouldn't the plural 
of house be hice?

> Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
> "transparency"? [Aside from also happening to be a noun. God English is 
> complicated!]

The formation of 'transparency' from 'transparent' is straightforward, 
as the sound 'ts' equates to soft 'c'.  See also: elegant/elegance. 
(don't ask me where the effectively added s comes from)

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
> "transparency"? 

If it's plural, or can be made plural, or can be made possessive, it's a 
noun.  (Forget that "person place or thing" nonsense.)

If it can be conjugated, it's a verb. (Forget that "action word" nonsense.)

Hence, a transparency as in a clear sheet of plastic can be pluralized, and 
is hence a noun. Transparency as in the property of a substance can be made 
possessive: "The transparency's quality is low in this glass."

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I just spent 20 minutes reading various Wikipedia articles on grammar.
> 
> My head hurts now.
> 
> All I was trying to figure out is why there's no such word as "sheeps". 
> Several other words have this property, but I have no idea what it's 
> called.
> 
> Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
> "transparency"? [Aside from also happening to be a noun. God English is 
> complicated!]

Generally (there are probably exceptions, this is English), for any 
adjective ending in -ent of Latin origin, the word ending -ency is the 
state or quality of having the property denoted by the adjective, and 
sometimes can refer to a specific thing that has this property.

An example:

"While campaigning for the presidency, the president promised that there 
would be _transparency_ in his administration.  However, since taking 
office, there have been many things that are not at all _transparent_."

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Yes, natural languages are hard if you have to learn them as adults. 
Their grammars never fit altogether
into neat systems. There are always a lot of exceptions which have to be 
memorized or learned by use. As
children we learn them by use and they don bother us too much. English 
apparently much worse in this
respect because it is a kind of hodge-podge of other languages built on 
a more or less Germanic foundation.

Learning natural languages as adults is hard for most of us. Our 
language acquiring ability is greatest
when we are younger than 5 or 6 and for most people diminishes rapidly 
after that. I think that it is the fact
that that natural languages are not and cannot be made entirely 
systematic is what makes them such
powerful tools for communication.

It's no surprise that 20 minutes reading about grammar on Wikipedia left 
you with less than perfect
understanding of grammar. Many people have devoted their whole lives to 
it. A few years
studying their works and you might begin to get a glimmer.:)

David

Invisible wrote:
> I just spent 20 minutes reading various Wikipedia articles on grammar.
> 
> My head hurts now.
> 
> All I was trying to figure out is why there's no such word as "sheeps". 
> Several other words have this property, but I have no idea what it's 
> called.
> 
> Also: "transparent" is an adjective. But what the hell is 
> "transparency"? [Aside from also happening to be a noun. God English is 
> complicated!]

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:40:23 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> But what the hell is "transparency"?

A noun.  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transparency?jss=0

I would also think it's an adjective (as it defines an attribute of 
objects), but I don't see that in the dictionary entries.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

It's a noun made from an adjective. An attribute is also a noun. But a 
noun can be part of an
"adjective phrase", i.e. "the depth *of transparency* ..." Here the noun 
"depth" is modified by
the adjectival prepositional phase which contains the noun 
"transparency". Languages are capable of
an almost infinite variety of such structures which gives them their power.

David


Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:40:23 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> 
>> But what the hell is "transparency"?
> 
> A noun.  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transparency?jss=0
> 
> I would also think it's an adjective (as it defines an attribute of 
> objects), but I don't see that in the dictionary entries.
> 
> Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:20:59 -0500, David H. Burns wrote:

> It's a noun made from an adjective. An attribute is also a noun. But a
> noun can be part of an
> "adjective phrase", i.e. "the depth *of transparency* ..." Here the noun
> "depth" is modified by
> the adjectival prepositional phase which contains the noun
> "transparency". Languages are capable of an almost infinite variety of
> such structures which gives them their power.

Oh, right - I had a brain cramp. :-)  Yeah, an attribute would be a 
noun.  :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Once we learn to use the structures of our languages we forget what the 
structures are called,
unless it is somehow brought to our attention -- as it is when we try to 
learn another language
as a adult. But in general we continue to use them efficiently and 
correctly. It like riding a bicycle,
once you learn how you don't forget.:)

David


Jim Henderson wrote:

> Oh, right - I had a brain cramp. :-)  Yeah, an attribute would be a 
> noun.  :-)
> 
> Jim

Post a reply to this message