22-Mar-2004, 00:07
|
 | VIP Member | | Join Date: Nov 2002 Country: USA
Posts: 6,095
Current Location: New York First Language: American English Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
| |
 Re: vocabulary
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Casiopea Quote: |
Originally Posted by MikeNewYork Quote: |
Originally Posted by Casiopea The traffic police were searching for evidence to prove the accused man's fault, but in vain. | Quote:
Agreed. The accused man has guilt (i.e, man's guilt) is fine in terms of structure. It's the prove X (VO) structure that I find somewhat sematically odd.
The problem I see is not with the noun 'guilt' per se. It's with the transitive nature of the verb 'prove'. The way I see it is like this. One can establish that guilt exists (Verb-Obj-Comp), but one cannot prove guilt (Verb-Obj).
VO: "I'm going to prove your guilt." :(
VOC: "I'm going to prove your guilt exists." :)
It's a subtle difference, agreed, but it's a difference.
All the best,
| I understand your point, but "prove guilt" is very commonly used. The verb "prove" has a transitive use and "guilt" has the meaning of "legal culpability". I find "prove fault" to much odder. Google returns 8,400 hits for "prove guilt" and 2,100 hits for "prove fault". I guess it comes down to individual preference. :wink: | :) Apparently, The English test was not based on Googlenglish :) | It appears that it wasn't even up to that level. :wink:  |