Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm learning how to use 'as same as'.

  1. It's as hot as it was yesterday.
  2. It's as hot as yesterday.
  3. I go to the same school as you do.
  4. I go to the same school as you.

I think only 4. is wrong. The clause can be omitted only if it's 'someone/something is' but not 'someone/something does'. Is this correct?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

All four of your examples are correct and proper English.

The clause can be omitted only if it's 'someone/something is' but not 'someone/something does'.

This sounds like a pedant's rule, a prescriptive statement that represents someones opinion about how the language should work. However, this doesn't reflect the way that English actually does work. Native speakers of English happily produce and understand as clauses in which a verb other than be is omitted. The actual requirement is that the verb can be omitted so long as it's the same as the verb in the main clause:

I sing the same song as you. [sing]

The girls take the same classes as the boys. [take]

But in the following example, the verb cannot be omitted:

We sing the same tune as the pianist plays.

share|improve this answer
    
I think in (3), "do" stands in for "go to". I find it interesting that it would be (more or less) okay to use "go to", provided you also discard the word "as". And (just about) the same applies in your own examples. –  FumbleFingers Jul 26 '11 at 17:01

I think (3) is more technically correct, but only a hopeless pedant would notice, let alone mention, the difference between (3) and (4). No offense.

share|improve this answer
2  
This answer would be improved by elaborating on why, or where (formal writing?) it would be more correct to use (3), or where they are interchangeable :) –  aedia λ Jul 26 '11 at 0:52
    
Possibly both you and OP at some time or other came across advice that (3) is 'non-preferred', but it may be a forlorn hope that either of you will be able to trace and provide here the source. Or perhaps you take this position because of something about how the usage conflicts with your "internal grammarian's" sense of "rightness", in which case it would be interesting to hear more of that. –  FumbleFingers Jul 26 '11 at 16:53

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.