Timeline for Should "in-cabin" be hyphenated in "the dogs must ride in-cabin on the airplane"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 4, 2019 at 10:54 | comment | added | Toothrot | There seems to be a difference in pronunciation between He travels in-cabin and He travels in cabin. The latter of which sounds wrong. | |
| Apr 29, 2018 at 14:59 | comment | added | linguisticturn | @sumelic I definitely plan to address the comments both of you have made, but it might take a bit of time. | |
| Apr 29, 2018 at 14:43 | comment | added | linguisticturn | @sumelic A question for both of you: I really disagree that this question is a duplicate, simply because one of the issues is the grammatical status of the word group. First of all, do you agree? And if you do, what would be the best way to challenge that marking? | |
| Apr 29, 2018 at 14:40 | comment | added | linguisticturn | @JanusBahsJacquet Thank you both for the comments! I'm thinking about how best to answer them (without simply appealing to the authority of CGEL, which just states that PPs don't appear in that function, though some single prepositions like downstairs do). I may change my mind about some things int he process, too... | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 20:00 | comment | added | herisson | @JanusBahsJacquet: Oh, the "very" issue came up in my answer to a previous question by linguisticturn (I still am not sure about whether it has a satisfactory answer): In the PP 'near here', why is 'near' the head? | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 19:58 | comment | added | herisson | @JanusBahsJacquet: I'm also not sure about whether it's true that "compound adjectives" are always hyphenated. | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 19:58 | comment | added | herisson | @JanusBahsJacquet: Yes, this answer doesn't seem to explain why these are considered to be "compound adjectives". I'd be interested in seeing more on that. I think "a very on-the-spot solution" feels acceptable. I'm not sure if it is impossible for "very" to modify PPs, though (a related question doesn't seem to give a clear answer; I think I remember seeing some other discussion of this somewhere in relation to a Safire article, but I forget where). | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 19:53 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @sumelic That’s rather circular logic, though. PPs cannot be modifiers, so when we see PPs that act as modifiers, they must be compound adjectives; therefore, there are no PP modifiers. I have no problem calling them compound adjectives as such, but the statement that PPs cannot act as modifiers is at least unsubstantiated in this answer. | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 19:45 | comment | added | herisson | @JanusBahsJacquet: the second part of that sentence explains why your proposed counterexamples aren't, according to linguisticturn's analysis: "so we must consider in-cabin as a compound adjective". I assume linguisticturn would say that out-of-body, on-the-spot, and by-the-hour are likewise "compound adjectives" in the phrases that you mention. | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 19:04 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | “Normally, PPs cannot function as pre-head modifiers in noun phrases (NPs)” — Can they not? I can think of plenty of PPs that are quite happy to function as NP modifiers (normally hyphenated): an out-of-body experience, an on-the-spot solution, by-the-hour rentals, etc. It’s not particularly common for PPs to modify in this way, but it doesn’t seem right to state that PPs normally cannot act as such. The impediment seems more semantic than syntactic to me. (Nonetheless, +1. It’s a good, authoritative answer, and I have no idea why anyone downvoted it.) | |
| Apr 28, 2018 at 14:36 | history | edited | linguisticturn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 268 characters in body
|
| Apr 28, 2018 at 14:31 | history | edited | linguisticturn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 268 characters in body
|
| Apr 28, 2018 at 14:21 | history | answered | linguisticturn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |