More (Of)

[jimcool]

"He is more of a student than a teacher."
"He is more a student than a teacher."

If I want to talk about a student teacher that acts like a teacher student, which sentence is standard English?

[Gillnetter]

"He is more of a student than a teacher."
"He is more a student than a teacher."

If I want to talk about a student that acts like a teacher, which sentence is standard English?

This sounds more like a teacher acting as a student then a student acting as a teacher.

[jimcool]

Sorry for the error. Here is the correct version:
-----------------------------------------------------

"He is more of a student than a teacher."
"He is more a student than a teacher."

If I want to talk about a teacher that acts like a student, which sentence is standard English?

[TheParser]

Sorry for the error. Here is the correct version:
-----------------------------------------------------

"He is more of a student than a teacher."
"He is more a student than a teacher."

If I want to talk about a teacher that acts like a student, which sentence is standard English?

NOT A TEACHER


(1) I really liked your question, for it really made me think and do research.

(2) This is only my opinion, based on what I have read in Professor George O. Curme's

great book A Grammar of the English Language.

(3) IF I understood him, you can express that idea in two ways:

(a) He is more student than teacher.

(i) "more student" is like an adjective. It refers to "He." It's an adjective, just

like "He is taller than the teacher." ("-er" really = more. Of course, you cannot say "He is studenter than teacher.")

(b) He is more of a student than a teacher.

(i) The great professor says that in this construction (kind of sentence), we analyze

"more" as a pronoun. That is why we need to use "of a."

(4) Here are some of his examples when we use "more" to make an adjective out of a

noun:

She is more mother than wife.
She was more woman than they. (You can't say "womaner")

(5) Here are some of his examples when we use "more" as a pronoun:

Charles was more of a gentleman than a king.
Smith is more of a teacher than his brother.

(6) It is only my opinion that most native speakers would use the pronoun sentence:

Tom: Do you like our teacher?

Mona: Not really.

Tom: Why?

Mona: Because he seems to be more of a student than a teacher.

Tom: What do you mean?

Mona: Well, for one thing, he wants to be cool, so he wears blue jeans. I want my teachers to dress like teachers.

Tom: And what else?

Mona: He tries so hard to be friends. I don't want my teachers to be my friends. I just want them to teach me something that I don't know.

Tom: That's right!

Mona: Above all, he doesn't know his subject well. I think that he reads the book five

pages ahead of us every night.

EDIT: I think that many speakers drop the "of," so they might simply say: He is more (of) a student than a teacher. Since you are an excellent learner, I suggest that you include the word "of."

[JohnParis]

Jimcool's initial clarification of the meaning he sought was: " If I want to talk about a teacher that acts like a student, which sentence is standard English"?

All of the above responses are great (although I do think Mona sounds a bit malicious) but I think it's important to state that if you wish to say that the teacher acts more like a student then that's exactly what you should say. He acts more like a student than a teacher.

In US graduate schools, professors often have teaching assistants (TA) who teach (supposedly) less than they study. Lets say Jim is a TA. Jim is more of a student than a teacher. Jim is more a student than a teacher. Both sentences work to describe Jim.

Finally, to TheParser whose posts I enjoy immensely, George O. Curme's book was published in 1931, and I don't think it was ever revised. His work is classic rather than modernistic. While still totally accurate, George - like myself - should have a 25,000 mile check-up, if just to freshen the carpeting.
George Oliver Curme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[5jj]

Finally, to TheParser whose posts I enjoy immensely, George O. Curme's book was published in 1931, and I don't think it was ever revised. His work is classic rather than modernistic.

Oh, Parser. I have been joined. You'll have to be very careful in what you pick from the venerable Curme now.

While still totally accurate (for the English of his day - 5) George - like myself - should have a 25,000 mile check-up, if just to freshen the carpeting.

[TheParser]

As the young people say (I think):

CURME RULES!

CURME ROCKS!

CURME IS THE MAN!

[5jj]

CURME RULES! ...

... are sometimes inappropriate today.