If someone asks "How far is Brazil from Argentina", a possible answer is "It's about X kilometers". However, if someone asks "How high is this mountain?" you can answer "It's about X meters high". I think that "It's about X kilometers far" would sound weird, but I don't whether it's correct or not. Could you help me?

  • You're comparing two different kinds of questions. The first has two end points and simply asks for the difference; the second, however, marks neither endpoint, and only identifies the mountain, so it needs more specification in the answer. Note that the dimension in a mountain is vertical (How high? That high) and that has to be specified in the question. Note that it could be answered with just a measure phrase, like the first one, but high is allowed. How high is Mt. Baker? It's 3286 meters (high). Jul 11 '13 at 0:39
  • @JohnLawler Height also has two endpoints - sea level and the summit. Height is the difference.
    – bib
    Jul 11 '13 at 1:12
  • Yes, but neither is mentioned in the sentence. One has to infer them, and one should specify that that's necessary. Jul 11 '13 at 2:13
  • You wouldn't say "he's around 90 kilograms heavy", either. Jul 11 '13 at 15:42

In sentences like

  • How high is the mountain?
  • How far is Brazil?

high and far function as adjectives, and the question asks about a quality of the adjective.

High can be used on its own, intensified, or qualified:

  • The mountain is high.
  • The mountain is very high.
  • The mountain is three miles high.

Far can only be intensified. It can't be qualified, and it's odd on its own:

  • ?Brazil is far.
  • *Brazil is 12000 miles far.
  • Brazil is very far.

The difference between far and high may be due to direction of measurement. Although we live in a three-dimensional world with mountains, we move on its surface and default to measuring in its two dimensions. High [and deep] can be qualified because when we measure vertically we need to specify that direction; far can't be qualified because it doesn't refer, and doesn't need to refer, to a direction.

If you need to qualify far, you need to use a word which can be qualified like away ("Brazil is 12000 miles away") but that's a different question. Away can't be used on its own in this sense (*Brazil is away) or intensified (*Brazil is very away).

  • I would analyze "far away" as a two-word grammatical unit here, and not as a two-component phrase. Jul 11 '13 at 15:29
  • I deliberately didn't mention far away.
    – Andrew Leach
    Jul 11 '13 at 16:00
  • You're right ... I clearly misread your last paragraph. Jul 11 '13 at 16:40
  • Thank you all very much for your help. It makes a lot of sense. Jul 13 '13 at 19:15

When you are discussing distance (from A to B), you have got to specify A and B, either implicitly or explicitly. In other words, distance involves two points that need to be specified.

On the other hand, height is a characteristic of a single object, so you only need to specify the object itself, again either implicitly or explicitly. So you can properly say:

A is x metres high

With distance you can use distant similarly to high, but because you need to specify A and B, the phrasing is usually slightly different, e.g.:

A is x km distant from B
A is x km distant [from here]

But it's often easier and clearer to say:

The distance from A to B is x km.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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