0

The experiences of 1927–1933 were of so extraordinary a character that they scarcely provide a valid criterion for judging the usefulness of security analysis.

I don't understand the structure from this sentence. What is the meaning of "the experiences of 1927–1933 were of so extraordinary a character that they..."?

he use "a character" after extraordinary, i mean why not "a extraordinary character" instead??

put on hold as off-topic by JJJ, jimm101, NVZ, TaliesinMerlin, Mari-Lou A Jul 12 at 6:40

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    What part don’t you understand? Have you looked up unfamiliar words? – Xanne Jun 14 at 4:41
  • The experiences that [we] had in the period from 1927 to 1933 were so unusual that those experiences... – Minty Jun 14 at 4:57
  • he use "a character" after extraordinary, i mean why not "a extraordinary character" instead?? – lucky Jun 14 at 8:29
  • ... Possibly, if s/he'd used 'of such an extraordinary character', someone would be asking "why not 'of so extraordinary a character'?". @Minty's real-English version (though I'd probably use 'events') is a vast improvement on either. (I'd probably work in 'anomalous / anomalies' too.) – Edwin Ashworth Jun 14 at 8:55
  • 2
    It's just an idiom, Lucky. "I waited for so long a time that I fell asleep" says the same as "I waited for such a long time that I fell asleep", or even "I waited so long that I fell asleep." Using different idioms adds variety to a piece of writing. Changes the rhythm. Stops it getting dull. Another example for you to try and fathom: "His life was of so short a duration that it didn't encompass either courtship or marriage." – Old Brixtonian Jun 14 at 21:35

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.