At the suggestion of the kind commenter, let me discuss the syntax of
All mimsy were the borogoves
There are two possibilities. The first is that mimsy is a noun, in which case we have the structure
Subject Copulative-Verb Predicate-Complement
Subject = Noun Phrase All mimsy
Copulative Verb = were
Predicate Complement = Noun Phrase the ...
There's a nursery rhyme that starts like this:
This is the house that Jack built.
This is the cheese that lay in the house that Jack built.
This is the rat that ate the cheese
That lay in the house that Jack built.
This is the cat that chased the rat
That ate the cheese that lay in the house that Jack built.
This is the dog that worried the cat
The sentence is clearly concocted to show the practical limits in the depth to which our natural ability to parse sentences applies recursively. (That one was not quite as bad.) Language allows sentences to be modified by adding some auxiliary phrases, or replacing some part by a more elaborate construct playing the same role in the context, and it would be ...
I would have no theoretical (as opposed to practical) problem with this sentence:
The woman [that] the man [that] the girl loved had met [last week] died [earlier today].
But to me a crucial break in coherence occurs in the sentence
The woman the man the girl loved met died.
because here the author tries to make met stand in for had met, forcing ...
Of boughten the OED writes:
boughten, ppl. a. [irreg. f. bought ppl. a. by assimilation to foughten] = bought ppl. a. used poet. for the sake of metre, otherwise only dial. and in U.S. in application to purchased as opposed to home-made articles.
Under the OED’s entry for buy, in the section on that verb’s inflections and their historical spellings, at ...
The particular sentence is a poor attempt at making an example of a sentence that is both grammatical but very difficult to process because of the multiple center embedding.
Spelled out the sentence is supposed to mean:
Women (that men (that girls love) meet) die"
"Some girls love some men. Those men met some women. Those women died".
To make ...
tl;dr: The part of speech of mountains is here a noun. It’s the direct object of the verb climbing.
How we know that climbing is a verb, though, is more work. That’s because it might instead be a noun or an adjective. It’s a verb as just mentioned, but let’s look at all three cases just to make sure.
We’ll assume that for parts of speech, your possible ...
Later in the book, Humpty Dumpty gives Alice an explanation of the odd words in the poem and he defines 'mimsy' as 'miserable and flimsy'. In other words, we know it is an adjective because Lewis Carroll intended it to be one.
You pays your money and you takes your choice:
Traditional grammar calls it an adverb: a word which modifies words which are not nouns.
—But down plays an obligatory role in this sentence; I see no sense in which it can be said to "modify" put.
Some contemporary grammarians call it a particle:
a word that
does not belong to one of the main ...
Fortunately, Carroll's own definition assigns the part of speech to 'mimsy'. Otherwise, the word might now be taken as an early and unprecedented appearance of the British regional 'mimsy', also an adjective, but with a somewhat different meaning, although latterly sometimes influenced by Carroll's coinage:
Prim; careful; affected; feeble, weak, ...
I originally made a quick python script on the "Part of Speech Database" here, which is a combination WordNet and Moby. Then I modified it to run on the frequency list here, based on COCA.
The first script found 29476 words ending in -y, of which 13677 were -ly. Therefore we are left with 15799 words ending in -y but not -ly. Among these words, only 2643 ...
Of is just a preposition used to say what group or whole includes the part denoted by the preceding word:
Example: most of/ one of/ several of my friends etc.
In the case of all, half, and both; of is optional and you can either omit it or keep it.
But you can't leave out of before the pronouns us, you, them, and it *.
*You don't need to worry ...
These are six words that have been carefully selected to match grammatical rules while being incomprehensible to a human being. They are a puzzle that can be solved (as some of the answers show).
Grammatical rules should reflect the reality of the language. The reality of the English language is that if the complexity of a sentence is too high, it cannot ...
I think you're referring to the term zeugma.
A figure of speech in which a word applies to two others in different senses (e.g. John and his driving licence expired last week).
The dictionary entry also references the term syllepsis:
A figure of speech in which a word is applied to two others of which it ...
Something that hasn't been mentioned yet: "all" here is being used as an adverb. Some examples of common English phrases using this construction:
all worked up (thoroughly excited or upset e.g. "She got all worked up at the idea of adopting a baby.")
all right (meaning in a satisfactory manner or to a satisfactory extent)
all ready/all set (meaning "fully ...
It depends who you want to satisfy with your classification. If you must classify into the traditional eight parts of speech, there is considered a pronoun (Dictionary.com - see below), specifically a dummy subject (Wikipedia), usually termed "existential there" 1,2,3 - search term in Google Books.
(used to introduce a sentence ...
Noun: "Like fuck you will!."
Also, since this is contended: Hard as fuck or Yes, thank you, I'd love a fuck.
Pronoun: "I hit fuck-face over there with a baseball bat." (both cheating and plagiarizing @Joe but you said nothing about hyphenated forms)
Adjective: "He's fucked!"
Verb: "I love to fuck while eating duck."
Adverb: "It was fuck hard", yes, ...
Women men meet die
Men girls love
Women men girls love meet die
So, similar to Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo... and John had had 'had'..., it is a valid sentence, but how to parse it is completely non-obvious to even native speakers. And that's the point the paper is trying to make: "Being parsable according to the rules of grammar" is not ...
According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, "the general definition of interjection is that it is a category of words that do not combine with other words in integrated syntactic constructions, and have expressive rather than propositional meaning." It seems to me that oink and bong fit that definition. Onomatopoeia is not one of the parts of ...
The original source of the sentence is Eric Wanner (1980) “The ATN and the Sausage Machine: Which One is Baloney?” Cognition,
volume 8, pages 209-225.
Wanner also republished as "The Parser's Window" in The Congnitive Representation of Speech 1981, pages 211-223.
Wanner starts from the sentence:
a. [The beautiful young woman][the man the girl loved][met ...
It depends what you mean by “correct”. Different varieties of English — e.g. standard US English, or standard British English, or various regional dialects — work differently. He snuck round the back is correct in US English, but not in British English, where it would be He sneaked round the back. From a linguistic point of view, ‘correct’ means that some ...
There are a few recently contrived words that try to do this; optionality is indeed used from time to time, and I've seen things like mandatoriness too. But actually there are some more established words that do the same job.
Of course, optional-ness is actually binary - something is either optional or mandatory. Therefore the quality of optionality/...
There's no 's' because it is not a verb, it is a noun.
The sentence means
Germany's new look defence will be tested by the speed of the Ukrainian team
The Ukraine team is in a hurry to test Germany's new look defence
This is evidenced in the article itself where it says
Ukraine, while outsiders, are certain to test the Germans' new-look ...
What the author is saying in this case is that Strassen's algorithm is very, very, hidden, i.e. even less obvious than 'not at all obvious'. An understatement is saying something in terms milder than reality; in other words, you're not doing reality justice by describing it in such a mild way.
Thus, to say that 'not at all obvious' is an understatement ...
Michael Swan says in his book *Practical English Usage:
1> All and *All of**
All (of) can modify nouns and pronouns.
Before a noun with a determiner (for example the, my, this), all and all of are both possible. American English usually has all of.
She's eaten all (of) the cake. All (of) my friends like riding.
Before a noun with no determiner, we do ...
Women men girls love meet die.
The sentence is perfectly grammatical. Here it is with the grammatically omisible pronouns inserted:
Women whom men that girls love meet die.
It might be easier to parse with a determiner and a comma:
Any women whom men that girls love meet, die.
It can be glossed like this:
If men loved by girls meet women, the women die....