Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1/30
2/30
1. INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Aims of the unit.
Unit 14, untitled The Expression of Quality , is primarily intended to serve as an introduction to the
different ways of expressing quality in English, namely achieved by means of adjectives, and also
by means of adverbs and other grammatical structures. In doing so, the study will be divided into
six main chapters. Thus, Chapter 2 provides a theoretical framework for the notion of quality, and
in particular, of those grammatical categories which are involved in it. Moreover, within the field of
grammar linguistic theory, some key terminology is defined in syntactic terms so as to prepare the
reader for the descriptive account on the expression of quality in subsequent chapters.
Chapter 3, then, presents and defines the notion of quality regarding adjectives and the other
grammatical categories involved in it, such as adverbs, past participles, and other means. Moreover,
adjectives are classified according to their three main functions: semantic, in terms of opposite pairs
(stative vs. dynamid; inherent vs. non-inherent; gradable vs. non-gradable); morphological, in
terms of adjective formation processes (affixation and compounding); and syntactic, which is
introduced by the notion of adjectival phrase, and moves on to examine adjectives in attributive and
predicative positions.
Once this key terminology and key notions are presented, we are ready to move on to next section,
Chapter 4, which offers a descriptive account of the different ways of expressing quality through
the expression of degree and comparison. Thus, we shall divide this section in two subsections. The
first part introduces the expression of degree, by examining types of degree specification by means
of pre-modifiers (intensifying adverb phrases), by associative semantic fields (scalar
measurements), and by comparison (degree specification).
Once introduced, the second part examines the expression of comparison, which is divided into
three subsections: first, types of comparison (inferiority, equality, superiority ); second, formation
processes (regular and irregular); and third, spelling and pronunciation changes. different
grammatical categories and by other means. Chapter 5 provides an educational framework for the
expression of quality within our current school curriculum, and Chapter 6 draws a conclusion from
all the points involved in this study. Finally, in Chapter 7, bibliography will be listed in alphabetical
order.
(University of Nijmegen, Holland) in English Syntactic Structures (1988), whose material has been
tested in the classroom and developed over a number of years; also, another essential work is that of
Rodney Huddleston, English Grammar, An Outline (1988).
Other classic references which offer an account of the most important and central grammatical
constructions and categories in English regarding the expression of quality, are Quirk &
Greenbaum, A University Grammar of English (1973); Thomson & Martinet, A Practical English
Grammar (1986); and Greenbaum & Quirk, A Students Grammar of the English Language (1990).
Current approaches to notional grammar and, therefore, the expression of quality are Angela
Downing and Philip Locke, A University Course in English Grammar (2002); Gerald Nelson,
English: An Essential Grammar (2001); Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, The
Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (2002); and Sidney Greenbaum, The Oxford
Reference Grammar (2000).
2.
Before describing in detail the different ways of expressing quality in English (mainly achieved by
means of adjectives, and also adverbs, past participles, and other means), it is relevant to establish
first a theoretical framework for the notion of quality, since it must be described in grammatical
terms. In fact, this introductory chapter aims at answering questions such as where the notion of
quality is to be found within the linguistic level, what it describes and how, and which grammar
categories are involved in its description at a functional level. Let us examine, then, in which
linguistic level the notion of quality is found.
and what they mean. Finally, another dimension between the study of linguistic form and the study
of meaning is semantics, or the semantic level, to which all four of the major components are
related. We must not forget that a linguistic description which ignores meaning is obviously
incomplete.
Therefore, we must point out that each of the linguistic levels discussed above has a corresponding
component when analysing the notion of quality. Thus, phonology deals with pronunciation of
comparative and superlative forms (i.e. easier, the easiest); morphology deals with comparative and
superlative markers (i.e. er, -est); and syntax deals with the establishment of rules that specify
which combinations of words constitute grammatical strings and which do not (i.e. shorter than; the
shortest in the world).
On the other hand, lexis deals with the expression of quality by means of affixes (i.e. long-haired,
loud mouthed) or suffixes (i.e. ful as in careful, -less as in careless, and so on); the choice between
adjectives or adverbs (i.e. He is a good driver vs. He drives well), lexical choices regarding
intensifying adjectives (i.e. funny vs. really funny vs. hilarious), the use of emphatic determiners
(i.e. very/ quite/really nice), past participles and present participles (i.e. bored vs. boring) or other
means such as idiomatic expressions (i.e. the sooner, the better); and finally, semantics deals with
meaning where syntactic and morphological levels do not tell the difference (i.e. You are nice
you, 2 nd person singular or you, 2nd person plural).
5/30
This adjectival description is often embedded in adjectival phrases where adjectives may be placed
in two positions: in attributive position, before nouns to qualify the head of a noun phrase (i.e. a
small table ), or in predicative sentences after the verb, functioning as subject complement (i.e. It
seems small) or object complement (i.e. I find the table small).
It is worth pointing out that not all languages have a distinct adjective class. In those languages
which do, there is a tendency for verbs to be dynamic (denoting actions, events, etc) and for
adjectives to be static. Note in this connection that in English adjectives generally occur more
readily in the non-progressive constructions than in the progressive (i.e. Edward is tall vs. Edward
is being tall), but we shall review this aspect in detail in the section devoted to semantic
classification of adjectives.
3.
As stated before, the expression of quality will be first examined through the category of adjectives,
and then we shall offer a descriptive approach through other grammatical categories related to it,
such as adverbs, past and present participles, and other grammatical structures like prepositional
phrases, idiomatic expressions or verbless sentences as possible answers to questions such as How
...? and What ....... like?
6/30
Moreover, before we continue, we must note that, although adjectives are mainly classified in two
groups: determinatives (possessive, demonstrative, numerals, interrogative, and indefinite) which
determine nouns as in this book or your house, and qualitative, to add qualities to a noun as in
this interesting book or your nice house, our study will be primarily based on the notion of
qualitative adjectives since it is this category that is gradable and will lead us to the expression of
degree and comparison further on.
In the following chapters, then, we shall examine the main issues that will provide the base for the
whole unit. Thus, (1) main features of adjectives; (2) the expression of quality in terms of other
grammatical categories, (3) a classification of adjectives according to their main functions, thus
semantic, syntactic, and morphological. First, within the semantic function, we shall examine three
intrinsic aspects of adjectives. Second, within the morphological function, we shall examine the
formation of adjectives by different means, among which we highlight affixation and compounding.
Third, within the syntactic function, we shall examine first compounding in depth since it is in this
process that other phrase structures shall function as adjectives acting like modifiers (attributive
positions) and complements (predicative positions). Once these notions have been stated, we shall
examine the order of adjectives in order to introduce next chapter on the expression of degree and
comparison.
7/30
8/30
Note that most qualitative (or gradable) adjectives are suitable for comparison since they include
modifiers in their syntactic structures (i.e. a formal report/more formal than/the most formal)
whereas classifying adjectives (or non-gradable) do not allow any modifiers in their structure since
they refer to more technical adjectives or denote provenance (i.e. an atomic/British report/a
more atomic/British report/the most atomic/British report).
phrases among which we namely distinguish two processes: (1) affixation and (2) compounding
which are the most straightforward type of creating an adjective by morphologic al processes.
participle: home -made pizza, tongue-tied, sun-burnt, and self-addressed envelopes. Moreover,
we also find compounds made up of other different categories. For instance:
(a) noun + adjective, as in tax-free, blood-red, sky-blue, air-tight, foot-sore, snow-white,
and stone-cold.
(b) adjective + adjective, as in red-hot (chilly peppers), blue-green, dark-blue, and lightgreen.
(c) adjective or adverb + noun + ending ed, as in blue-eyed, bare-footed, long-legged, and
well-mannered.
(d) adverb + past participle, as in so-called, far-fetched, ill-bred, well-dressed or wellknown.
(e) adverb + present participle, as in hard-working or easy -going.
(f) other types of compounding and phrasal expressions will be dealt with in next section, under the
heading of syntactic functions.
12/ 30
hot (subject attribute) and I prefer my tea hot (object attribute). Similarly, examine: He looks
tired, This film is really interesting or It is difficult to do it now.
Note, however, that apart from the majority of adjectives which can be used both attributively and
predicatively, there are adjectives that can only be used in one of these ways. This aspect will be
dealt with in the same section on attributive and predicative adjectives.
Hence, following Greenbaum & Quirk (1990), adjectives are classified into two main types
according to their syntactic function in the sentence: thus (1) attributive and (2) predicative
adjectives. (3) adjectives with complementation or postmodification, (5) adjectives as head of nounphrases, (6) verbless clauses, (7) contingent verbless clauses, and (8) exclamatory clauses.
usual sense of an old friend of mine, old is restricted to attributive position. This implies the
notion of inherent and discussed before.
We usually find the attributive position when one or more adjectives premodify the head of a noun
phrase, as in a small garden, or an old Swiss watch appearing between the determiner (including the
zero article) and the head of a noun phrase, but occassionally we may also find it after the noun, as
in someone sensible to talk to. Therefore, we can distinguish between adjectives that are placed
(1) before and (2) after the noun.
(his latter years), live (a live wire), main (the main road ), mere (a mere girl), outer (the outer
space ), outdoor (outdoor activities), principal (the principal characters), chief (his chief excuse),
sheer (sheer luck ), upper (the upper storeys), only (the only problem), elder (my elder sister), eldest
(my eldest cousin), same (the same house), particular (this particular case), exact (the exact
amount), sole (the sole argument), specific (the specific point), very (the very man ), among others.
(iii) The third type are adjectives related to adverbs, which are non-inherent, even though they are
not intensifying or restrictive in attributive position, as in my former friend (formerly my friend),
an old friend (a friend of old), past students (students in the past), the present king (the king at
present). Some adjectives need implications additional to the adverbial: the late president (the
person who was formedly the president but now is dead). Moreover, if the adjectives premodify
agentive nouns, the latter also suggest a relationship to an associated verb (i.e. a heavy smoker, a
sound sleeper, a clever liar).
(iv) Finally, the fourth type refers to adjectives related to nouns, which are adjectives derived from
nouns, restricted now to attributive position (i.e. an atomic scientist, a criminal court, a medical
school, a musical comedy, a tidal wave, a polar bear, a golden ring). Note that these adjectives are
formed with the suffixes ic (atomic), -al (criminal), -en (golden).
The formation of comparatives and superlatives that, often, has an element preceding the first
constituent (i.e. more interesting than - the most interesting in...) shall be examined in the section of
predicative adjectives, in relation to postmodifier constituents.
(2) When the noun is preceded by more than one attributive adjective (i.e. beautiful sunny weather,
a big black horse), the order in which adjectives appear is not always free. According to Thomson
& Martinet (1986), several variations are possible, but a fairly usual order is generally established in
terms of semantic properties, whereby descriptive adjectives precede the limiting ones, from the
most general to the most specific features.
Moreover, in the premodification structure, Quirk (1973) distinguishes four main zones: (a)
precentral, where non-gradable and intensifying adjectives are placed (certain, definite, complete),
(b) central, where central adjectives are placed (funny, pretty, windy), (c) postcentral, where
participles and colour adjectives are included (retired, pink), and finally (d) prehead, where
adjectives derived from nouns are placed, like nationality (English, French), ethnic background
(Midwestern, southeast), with the meaning of consisting of, relating to (experimental, political,
statutory).
Hence, the order of the adjectives is to a large extent determined by the semantic class to which the
adjectives belong. In fact, it is possible to distinguish a large number of semantic classes, but we
shall confine ourselves to adjectives whose positional behaviour shows some regularity. Therefore,
following Quirk (1973), Thomson & Martinet (1986), Aarts (1988), and Eastwood (1999), we shall
distinguish:
15/ 30
First of all, general opinion, on how good something is (wonderful, nice, great, terrible ); most other
qualities (order, temperature); size, on how big things are (large, small, enormous, tiny) and shape,
on what shape things are (round, square, triangular); age, on how old someone or something is
(new, old, ten years old ); colour (red, blue, black, pink); origin, on where things/people are from
(American, British, Irish, Italian), material, on what things are made of (stone, plastic, paper, steel);
type, on what kind? (electric kettle, political meeting); and finally, nouns functioning as adjectives
which answer to the question What for?(summer, spring, a bread knife, a bath towel).
16/ 30
seen. Other examples are attorney general, the president elect, body politic, heir apparent, the
people involved.
3.2.3.3. Predicative adjectives.
Regarding predicative adjectives, we must say they refer to those adjectives which are placed after a
linking verb (i.e. feel, be, get, sound, seem, look like, looks as if, taste , among others) and can
function as subject complement of copulative verbs (i.e. This horse is black, They are nice) as well
as object complement after other verbs (i.e. He thought the horse black, He put the cloth straight, he
sounded serious, she felt cold ).
Note that adjectives are subject complement not only to noun phrases, but also to finite clauses and
nofinite clauses (i.e. That she is angry is obvious, it is obvious to complain). We must say that most
of them function like verbs and adverbs, and they tend to refer to a condition rather than to
characterize.
It is worth noting that some adjectives change their meaning when moved from attributive position
to the predicative one. Yet, bad/good, big/small, heavy/light and old, cannot be used predicatively
without changing the meaning, for instance, compare a small farmer vs. the farmer is small.
Here the former refers to a man who has a small farm whereas the latter means that he is a small
man physically.
We must bear in mind that, as constituents of clauses or sentences, adjective phrases can only
realize the functions subject attribute (i.e. The new edition will be available on Monday, He is
becoming quite big for his boots) and object attribute (i.e. It made him very sad to see his son
abroad, Wed like the sheets a little cleaner). Yet, in predicative positions, it is usual to find more
complex adjective phrases modifying a noun phrase head, especially those with longer
postmodifiers. Here we are five examples which illustrate the predicative use of adjectives.
3.2.3.3.1. Adjectives with complementation or postmodification.
Adjectives with complementation or postmodification cannot normally have attributive position but
require postposition. The complementation may be realized by:
(1) The adverb enough, which is the only adverb that can postmodify an adjectival head (i.e. clever
enough). Note that enough may be followed by an infinitive clause (i.e. quick enough to be in time ).
(2) A prepositional phrase, formed by adjective + preposition + noun (i.e. suitable for me, good at
Maths, larger than yours, a car similar to yours,), except for some cases such as averse ( i.e. people
averse to hard work) and fond (i.e. He is fond of skiing), which require postmodification. In other
cases postmodification is optional. Thus, afraid of (mice), good at (poker), glad of (a change), loyal
to (ones principles), qualified for (the job), able to (swim), capable of (murder), full of (water),
furious with (his friend), green with (envy), and worried about (you), among many others.
17/ 30
(3) A finite clause refers to the clausal postmodification of adjectival heads that is usually realized
by that-clauses, as in I am very worried that he might come late or I am glad that you come. Also,
clauses postmodifying adjectival heads may also be introduced by WH- words (or by if), as in I am
doubtful whether (if) I should go or He is not sure who did it.
After comparative adjectives in er, the finite clause is introduced by than, as in The trip was
longer than I expected. Moreover, note that the sentence Jim is prouder than his brother (was)
has an optional element at the end, which is an alternative construction with a reduced comparative
clause.
(4) In a non-finite clause, the adjectival head can be followed by an infinitive clause (i.e. afraid to
go, anxious to leave, interested to hear about it, or eager to please). Moreover, there are cases (i.e.
The boys easiest to teach were in my class) where the adjective may be preceded by too or followed
by enough (in some cases obligatorily so), as in This is a theory too difficult to explain and He is not
brave enough to jump.
Furthermore, the infinitive clause may be introduced by a WH- word, as in She feels uncertain
what to tell her husband or I do not know what to do next. If the infinitive clause has an overt
subject, it is introduced by for, as in I am quite willing for this plan to be submitted or I shall be
sorry for Esther to leave us. Moreover, the adjectives worth and busy are followed by an ing
participle clause, as in This problem is worth looking into or They were busy packing.
However, if the noun phrase is generic and indefinite, we can postpone coordinated adjectives with
some clause element added, although such constructions are formal and rather infrequent (i.e.
Soldiers timid or cowardly do not fight well), using premodification (i.e. Timid or cowardly soldiers
do not fight well) or by using a relative clause (i.e. A man who does not fight well is timid).
3.2.3.3.2. Other type of constructions.
Within other type of constructions, we shall deal with six different types, among which we shall
mention adjectives that can function as head of noun-phrases, verbless clauses, adjectives phrases
replaced by adverb phrases where we shall examine the semantic correspondences of adjectives and
adverbs, contigent adjective clauses, exclamatory clauses, and finally, that of discontinuous
modifier that will provide the base for us to enter next section on degree and comparison.
(1) Adjectives can function as head of noun-phrases, which can be subject of the sentence,
complement, object, and prepositional complement. When this occurs, adjectives do not inflect for
number or for the genitive case, and they usually require the definite determiner the. Most of these
structures have personal reference or refer to certain fairly well-established classes of entities. For
instance, groups of people (i.e. the brave, the rich, the poor), nationalities (i.e. the Dutch, the
British, the Spanish), and abstract reference (i.e. the mystical, the supernatural, the unreal).
18/ 30
(2) Verbless clauses, in addition, can function as the sole realization of a verbless clause or as the
head of an adjective phrase realizing the clause. For instance, in a sentence like The man,
enthusiastic, read the letter the clause is mobile, though it usually precedes or follows the subject
of the supe ordinate clause. For instance, Enthusiastic, the man opened the letter and The man
opened the letter, enthusiastic.
(3) Sometimes the adjective phrase can be replaced by an adverb phrase with little change of
meaning by means of the suffix (-ly) as in nice-nicely or zero marker as in hard-hard, substituting
the prepositional structure in a(n) + adjective + way/manner. For instance, Melanie was very
friendly and She spoke to us in a friendly way. Note that also a few adjectives end in ly and are
not adverbs (i.e. elderly, likely, lonely, silly, ugly), and there is a group of words that can function as
both (i.e. deep, early, fast, hard, high, late, long, low, near, right, straight, wrong).
We must pay attention to irregular adjectives, such as good and bad. In this pair, good is an
adjective, and well is its adverb. The opposites are bad and badly. For instance, Natasha is a
good violinist (adjective) and She plays the violin very well (adverb). Well can also be an
adjective meaning in good health, the opposite of ill, as in My father was ill, but hes quite well
now.
As we can see, there is a regular correspondence between adjectival and adverbial phrases regarding
semantic properties, as in We did some hard work (adjective) and We worked hard (adverb). In
this correspondence, according to Greenbaum & Quirk (1990), most intensifying adjectives may be
related to adverbs (i.e. certain-certainly, clear-clearly, complete -completely) as well as restrictive
adjectives (i.e. main-mainly, particular-particularly, exact-exactly). Thus, Rather enthusiastic, the
man opened the letter and Rather enthusiastically, the man opened the letter. In this function, the
adverb phrase is like the adjective phrase in referring to an attribute of the subject: The man, who
was rather enthusiastic, opened the letter.
(4) A contingent adjective clause is one type of verbless clause, which is often introduced by a
subordinator, expressing the circumstance or condition of what is said. For instance, in the
sentences (Whether) right or wrong, he always does what he wants; When fit, the Labrador is an
excellent retriever, If wet, do not place those shoes near the heat. When the contingent clause
refer to the object of the clause, this appears in final position, as in You must eat it when ready.
(5) Another type refers to exclamatory clauses, which deals with adjectives that function as the head
of an adjective phrase that is an exclamation. For instance, How good of you! / How interesting! /
Brilliant!
(6) Finally, within other predicative constructions, we must highlight that of discontinuous
modifier, which refers to comparative and superlative forms directly. This type, together with that
of finite clauses will be dealt with in next section under the heading of the expression of degree and
comparison.
19/ 30
4.
The expression of degree and comparison is to be drawn from the grammatical category of
adjectives and adverbs, apart from other type of constructions related to them. As stated before, the
prototypical adjective is gradable (i.e. beautiful, long, wide ), and as such takes degree expressions,
that is, by means of adverbs functioning as modifiers (i.e. almost, as, how, much, pretty, quite,
rather, so, this, that, too, very and such ly adverbs). Moreover, a special case of degree
specification is comparison, which is expressed either inflectionally (-er/-est) or analytically
(more/most) by means of degree adverbs.
Following Quirk (1973), gradable adjectives refer to qualitative adjectives where we measure the
amount of quality someone or something has by comparison (i.e. Anna is more/less talkative than
Susanne), and also by scalar correspondences (i.e. funny-hilarious, tiny-little). It is worth pointing
out that restrictive adjectives are non-gradable (i.e. atomic, anthropological) and therefore, not
submitted to the expression of degree or comparison. Hence, in next sections we shall examine the
different ways of expressing degree and comparison in terms of modifiers, morphological formation
processes, and many more aspects.
20/ 30
implicitly or explicitly at least two things (i.e. a better man, he is better than me/us); third, the
superlative expresses quality in its highest degree, even by comparing more than one thing (i.e. He
is the best man in the world/of the family) or not comparing, just by expressing an absolute
superlative (i.e. It is most interesting). Note that the prepositional phrase following it is in when
we deal with places, and of when it is anything else.
Comparison by degree specification may be expressed either inflectionally, as in bigger and
biggest, the comparative and superlative forms of big, or analytically, by means of the degree
adverbs more and most, as in more relevant, most relevant. For the most part only stems of one or
two syllables inflect, and indeed not all of these permit inflectional comparison. But we shall
examine this issue in depth in next section.
is/her ). The structure is formed by the discontinuous modifiers so/as + adjective in positive degree
+ as + (reduced) comparative clause or noun phrase (i.e. She is as pretty as her sister/her).
We also use other structures like as ... as in affirmative sentences and not so ... as and not as ...
as in negative ones. Moreover, we have alternative structures which indicate similar semantic
features by means of prepositional phrases, using like as a linking verb (i.e. You look like an actor
/ you are as attractive as an ac tor). If similarity is so precise, we may also use the same as +
pronoun/noun phrase/object) or a special structure to contrast (i.e. The longer I do exercise, the
happier I am).
Examine the sentence He is as tall as she/her/she is. Note that after the second element as we
may use a personal pronoun (she), and object (her) or pronoun + verb (she is). We may also use as
much ... as for non-count nouns (i.e. He has as much money as you ), and as many ... as with
count nouns (i.e. He has as many book s as you).
4.2.1.3. The higher degree: superiority.
And finally, the third type, to a higher degree is also called comparative of superiority. As its name
indicates, this type of comparison means that the item referred to may be compared (comparative)
or not (superlative) with respect to a group of possessors of a quality (i.e. Hes taller than her/He is
the tallest).
The structures used are formed, in the comparative and superlative either by suffixes (i.e. adjective
+ -er + than; adjective + -est + in/of ...) or analytic structures (i.e. more + adjective + than +
(reduced) comparative clause or noun phrase; the most + adjective + in/of ...). It is within this
one that we shall develop the rest of the unit, on the formation of comparatives and superlatives
forms.
Before moving on to next section, we must point out that comparative and superlative forms also
have different types. For instance, regarding comparatives, we may distinguish several types, apart
from the comparative of superiority. Thus, first, two comparatives related to idiomatic expressions:
the comparative of gradation, which is related t and which denotes a quality that increases gradually
(i.e. He is getting more and more impatient everyday) and the comparison of proportion, in which
the two qualities increase at the same time (i.e. The more he ran, the more I chased him). And
second, the so-called absolute comparative, which makes reference to a contrast instead of a
comparison (i.e. The former idea was better than the latter one).
Regarding superlatives, we mainly distinguish three types. Thus, first, the relative superlative,
which addresses to quality measurement within a group, highlighting the quality in one (or more)
possessors within that group (i.e. Which is your car? The cleanest). Second, the absolute
superlative, which addresses to quality in its higher degree (i.e. Which film did you like most?). And
finally, we refer to the superlative preceded by a possessive structure, which is addressed from the
23/ 30
semantic field by using the structure most + positive form (i.e. They sang their loudest=They sang
as loud as they could).
normal, recent and so on. Yet, according to Greenbaum & Quirk (1990), adjectives with the
negative un- prefix, such as unhappy and untidy, are exceptions (i.e. unhappier -unhappiest;
untidier-untidiest).
denotes quality or value. Thus, compare the sentences She should eat less food if she wants to be
fit vs. She is lesser woman than her sister. As we may observe, the comparative forms are placed
in a scale of measurement regarding count and non-count nouns.
4.2.2.1.5. Adjectives which do not function as adjectives.
Another point to hightlight in this section is the use of adjectives in comparative forms that do not
accept any degree of comparison due to semantic properties or their intrinsic nature (Snchez
Benedito, 1975). We refer to: (a) adjectives regarding time (i.e. annual, monthly); (b) regarding
material (i.e. wooden, golden); (c) shape (i.e. square, round); (d) extreme qualities (i.e. perfect,
eternal, supernatural). As seen, there are no grammatical reasons involved in these cases, just
semantic.
Again, we find those adjectives which, when added er, cannot be followed by than (i.e. former,
latter, inner, outer, neither, upper, and so on) since it expresses contrast and not degree, as in my
former teacher, the latter point, the inner truth, and so on. Similarly, the superlative most
indicates placement and not a quality (i.e. innermost, outmost, upmost, topmost, and so on) as in
The topmost window of the building.
27/ 30
5. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS.
The various aspects of the expression of quality dealt with in this study is relevant to the learning of
the vocabulary of a foreign language since differences between the vocabulary of the learner's
native language (L1) and that of the foreign language (L2) may lead to several problems, such as
the incorrect use of quality expressions, especially because of the syntactic, morphological, and
semantic processes carried out in the formation of comparative and superlative forms, as well as
comparison at the same degree still problematic for Spanish students of English.
This study has looked at the expression of quality within lexical semantics, morphology and syntax
in order to establish a relative similarity between the two languages that Spanish-speaking students
would find it useful for learning English if these connections were brought to their attention. An
adult Spanish ESL student generally perceives that there is a great distance from Spanish to English,
but a realization of how many words there are in common between current Spanish and English can
offer a learner a bridge to the new language.
The similarities and differences discussed in this study are based on a search for translation
equivalence in order to make student study easier. Current communicative methods may frown on
explicit teaching of similarities, but we must remember that learners search for equivalents and
translate from the L2 no matter how much teachers preach against it; offering learners
metalinguistic information about equivalents in lexical items simply makes it official. Learners use
hooks no matter how much teachers try to avoid them in a communicatively-based classroom .
It has been suggested that a methodology grounded in part in the application of explicit linguistic
knowledge enhances the second language learning process. In the Spanish curriculum (B.O.E.
2002), the expression of quality is understood is envisaged from earlier stages (ESO) up to higher
stages (Bachillerato), in terms of simple descriptions of people, things, and places in the lower
stages and more complex descriptions in the upper stages.
The expression of quality, that is, comparing items has been considered an important element of
language teaching because of its high-frequency in speech. We must not forget that the expression
of quality is mainly drawn from closed class categories, such as adjectives and adverbs, which have
a high-medium frequency of use when speaking or writing.
Hence, the importance of how to handle these expressions cannot be understated since you cannot
communicate without it. Current communicative methods foster the teaching of this kind of
specific linguistic information to help students recognize new L2 words. Learners cannot do it all on
their own. Language learners, even 2nd year Bachillerato students, do not automatically recognize
similiarities which seem obvious to teachers; learners need to have these associations brought to
their attention.
So far, we have attempted in this discussion to provide a broad account of the expression of quality
between Spanish and English that we hope prove successful and complete.
28/ 30
6. CONCLUSION
Although the questions What is your house like? or Can you describe me? may appear simple and
straightforward, they imply a broad description of the means that make an appropriate answer
suitable for students and teachers, which may be so simple if we are dealing with ESO students,
using simple grammatical structures and basic vocabulary, or so complex if we are dealing with
Bachillerato students, who must be able to describe people, places, and things using more complex
vocabulary and grammatical structures. So far, in this study we have attempted to take a fairly broad
view of the expression of quality since we are also assuming that there is an intrinsic connexion
between its learning and successful communication.
Yet, we have provided a descriptive account of Unit 14, untitled The Expression of Quality and the
expression of degree and comparison, whose main aim was to introduce the student to the different
ways of expressing quality in English by means of comparison. In doing so, the study provided a
broad account the notion of quality, starting by a theoretical framework in order to get some key
terminology on the issue, and further developed within a grammar linguistic theory, described in
syntactic terms as we were dealing with syntactic structures.
Once the notion of quality was presented, we discussed how adjectives, adverbs, and other
constructions reflected this notion. Obviously, so many items with so many different terminology
can make students feel unable to learn all the rules and exceptions involved in it. However, current
communicative methodology is intended to give a better account of the relation between form and
speech when communicating.
In fact, lexical items and vocabulary, and therefore, the expresin of quality, is currently considered
to be a central element in communicative competence and in the acquisition of a second language
since students must be able to describe people, things, and places in their everyday life in many
different situations. As stated before, the teaching of quality expressions comprises four major
components in our educational curriculum: phonology, grammar, lexicon, and semantics, out of
which we get five major levels: phonological, morphological and syntactic, lexical, and semantic.
In fact, for our students to express quality properly, they must have a good knowledge at all those
levels. First, on phonology which describes the sound level, that is, how to pronounce the different
ways of comparison and adjectives. Secondly, since the two most basic units of grammar are the
word and the sentence, they must have good grammatical knowledge, which invoves the
morphological level (i.e. the internal structure of adjectives) and the syntactic level (i.e. the way
words combine to form comparatives).
Third, the lexicon, or lexical level, lists vocabulary items, that is, different adjectives, adverbs, and
other expressions to denote quality, specifying how they are pronounced, how they behave
grammatically, and what they mean. Finally, another dimension between the study of linguistic
form and the study of meaning is semantics, or the semantic level, to which all four of the major
29/ 30
components are related, specially for those ways of expressing quality since it marks relevant
differences in similar sentences.
Therefore, it is a fact that students must handle the four levels in communicative competence in
order to be effectively and highly communicative in the classroom and in real life situations. The
expression of quality proves highly frequent in our everyday speech, and consequently, we must
encourage our students to have a good managing of it.
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
- Aarts, F., and J. Aarts. 1988. English Syntactic Structures. Functions & Categories in Sentence Analysis.
Prentice Hall Europe.
- B.O.E. RD N 112/2002, de 13 de septiembre por el que se establece el currculo de la Educacin
Secundaria Obligatoria/Bachillerato en la Comunidad Autnoma de la Regin de Murcia.
- Bolton, D. And N. Goodey. 1997. Grammar Practice in Context. Richmond Publishing.
- Council of Europe (1998) Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European
Framework of reference.
- Downing, A. and P. Locke. 2002. A University Course in English Grammar. London: Routledge.
- Eastwood, J. 1999. Oxford Practice in Grammar. Oxford University Press.
- Greenbaum, S. and R. Quirk. 1990. A Students Grammar of the English Language. Longman Group UK
Limited.
- Greenbaum, S. 2000. The Oxford Reference Grammar. Edited by Edmund Weiner. Oxford University Press.
- Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics, pp.
269-93. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Huddleston, R. 1988. English Grammar, An Outline. Cambridge University Press.
- Huddleston, R. and G.K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge
University Press.
- Nelson, G. 2001. English: An Essential Grammar. London. Routledge.
- Quirk, R & S. Greenbaum. 1973. A University Grammar of English. Longman.
- Snchez Benedito, F. 1975. Gramtica Inglesa . Editorial Alhambra.
- Thomson, A.J. and A.V. Martinet. 1986. A Practical English Grammar. Oxford University Press.
30/ 30