0

I came across this sentence:

"That was the year the Twilight movie was going to come out, and the kids were agog with all things vampire." — Shelley Dorrill (From Merriam-Webster's definition of 1.Agog)

I did quick search and this quote apparently comes from an interview with the author Shelley Dorrill.

Since vampire is a noun this sentence struck me as incorrect. I would have expected "the kids were agog with all things vampire-like/vampire-related" or, more so, "the kids were agog with all vampire-like/vampire-related things".

Was the interview setting that allowed for a laxer interaction (but then, why did MW dictionary choose to put this as a paradigmatic sentence?) or is it indeed grammatically correct?

5
  • Why do you dislike it? Would you accept "with all vampire things"?
    – Stuart F
    Commented Jul 31, 2022 at 18:40
  • 1
    @StuartF it sounds weird to me the ([noun] + "things") or the ("things" + [noun]) constructions. I would expect an adjective instead of a noun in this case.
    – q0mlm
    Commented Jul 31, 2022 at 18:54
  • 4
    Closely related, though they take the grammaticalness as a given: What does "All things X" mean?; "princess of all things shoes" what does this phrase mean? Commented Jul 31, 2022 at 18:59
  • It's using "vampire" as an abbreviation for "related to vampires"
    – Barmar
    Commented Aug 1, 2022 at 22:13
  • There is nothing wrong with 'all things vampire.' If there was a doubt there, I suggest it would be using 'agog with' rather than 'agog at…' Commented Sep 2, 2022 at 23:10

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.