I think I understand what he wants to say, but cannot figure out the sentence structure or I just don't know such a phrasal verb.
"I thought of the Lake Como what I had thought of Lugano."
The sentence you write means "I thought of Lake Como that which I had thought of Lugano." Follow the link to find out about cleft sentences.
-
1Right. What I had thought of Lugano (which looks like an embedded question) is actually what's called a Headless Relative Clause, and is equivalent to that (thought) which I had thought of Lugano. Headless relatives function as noun phrases, not as adjectives, because they have swallowed their coreferential head indefinite pronoun. Isn't English syntax fun? – John Lawler Feb 5 '12 at 18:29
-
1@JohnLawler: Absolutely. One of the reasons I fell in love with the English language. – Irene Feb 5 '12 at 18:34
-
1Oh, just noticed. This isn't actually a Cleft; it's at best an aberrant Pseudo-Cleft. There are other problems with the sentence, too, like article use and excessively complex structure. – John Lawler Feb 5 '12 at 18:39
-
@JohnLawler: Oops, I hadn't noticed the article use. I'll edit my answer. Thank you. I agree with your (more) accurate definition, too. Why don't you post your own answer? I'll be happy to upvote you. – Irene Feb 5 '12 at 18:54
To figure it out, substitute "I thought of the Lake Como" with "this was". E.g;
This was what I had thought of Lugano
There is a kind of comparison between the lakes.
One meaning of the phrasal verb to think of is to have an opinion about. So the sentence you quote means: I had the same opinion about Lake Como as I did about Lugano. The next sentence follows the same structure:
- I ate yesterday what I had eaten the day before.
