To Mike sensei

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

I've stated my professional opinion: The game did not get exciting; it got stirred up, heated, tense. :D (My personal opinion is of no consequence. It's all about what you think. 8))

What do you think? :D

OK, I tell you what.

Thank you for your professional opinion, but, as I stated in the first post, I know "excited" can be used for inanimated things as a metaphor meaning "heated", "manic", or the like.

What I'm curious about is whether the attributive use (e.g. "an excited game") and the predicative use (e.g. "the game became excited) of such "excited" are equally acceptable or not. And if they are not, I'd like to know why not. (As I said, I personally think the predicative use is a bit weird. But the reason I think it's weird is simply because I haven't seen such "excited" used as predicative.)

Your personal opinion, or native speakers' "feel", really counts, Casiopea, just because that's something I, a Japanese, don't have. :)

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Taka

What I'm curious about is whether the attributive use (e.g. "an excited game") and the predicative use (e.g. "the game became excited) of such "excited" are equally acceptable or not. And if they are not, I'd like to know why. (As I said, I personally think the predicative use is a bit weird. But the reason I think it's weird is simply because I haven't seen such "excited" used as predicative.)

Your personal opinion, or native speakers' "feel", really counts, Casiopea, just because that's something I, a Japanese, don't have. :)

Well, that's my point really. Why look elsewhere? The evidence is in the puddin', sort to speak. Given that a 'native speaker' has already in fact used it attributively as well as predicatively (ahem, two positions) tells us it's productive--it's not a one time thing.

Of course, grammatically, it's odd, but that's just because it's new. No matter its position, pre-nominal or post-nominal, it's adjectival in function. It describes, like this,

X became excited
an excited X

The awkward part, well, it's like when you buy a new pair of shoes. They feel awkward for the first couple of days until that is you get used to the 'feel' of them. No matter how awkward they feel, after some use, you won't 'feel' the difference. In other words, if something's new, it's going to feel awkward at first.

Communicatively, though, it's pretty expressive, don't you think? If you and I can make out the meaning, then the speaker has done his/her job quite well.

Look elsewhere in the grammar:

1. John became excited. (OK) Predicatively
2. It was an excited conversation. (OK) Attributively

Notice 'excited' in 1. and 2. have two different meanings. Also note, 'excited' is verbal in nature. It comes from a verb, so it behaves best with other verbs (i.e. predicatively), like 'became excited, got excited'.

3. John got excited. (OK) *3. and 4. have different meanings.
4. The game got excited. (OK)

Let's look at the other position.

5. He is an excited guy. (Not OK)
6. An excited game is what we don't need. (OK)

Why is 5. not OK and 6. OK? Does it have to do with animacy? Hmm.
Well, I don't believe it does because we can replace it with a surface-synonym, like this,

7. He's an over-excited kind of a guy. (OK)
8. An over-excited game. (OK)

9. He gets over-excited. (OK) Two verbals
10. The game gets over-excited. (OK) Two verbs

Aha! We've the key. It's omission. 8) The word over-excited is the missing link. :D I believe the speaker is using 'excited' in place of over-excited.

All the best,



.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

The awkward part, well, it's like when you buy a new pair of shoes. They feel awkward for the first couple of days until that is you get used to the 'feel' of them. No matter how awkward they feel, after some use, you won't 'feel' the difference. In other words, if something's new, it's going to feel awkward at first.
.

Hmm...it seems to me that it's so new that very few people know such usage exists; I mean, even here at UsingEnglish.com, Mike and Ron say "NO" to such "excited", the metaphorical one, used predicatively, and tdol is mulling over...

The pudding doesn't look so tasty so far.

Originally Posted by Casiopea

Communicatively, though, it's pretty expressive, don't you think? If you and I can make out the meaning, then the speaker has done his/her job quite well.

I agree. But if it's only you and I that make out the meaning, and it's not widely acceptable, I kind of hesitate to use it.

Originally Posted by Casiopea

5. He is an excited guy. (Not OK)
.

Are you sure on that one? I've tried Google search, and the results (the U.S area only) for "an excited man" are no less than 280.

[RonBee]

Originally Posted by Taka

Are you sure on that one? I've tried Google search, and the results (the U.S area only) for "an excited man" are no less than 280.

Actually, 280 isn't very many. Try comparing that with "an exciting man" and see what you get.

In my opinion, that usage of "excited" is slang. It might catch on, but the nature of slang is that it tends to be temporary.

:)

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Taka

Hmm...it seems to me that it's so new that very few people know such usage exists; I mean, even here at UsingEnglish.com, Mike and Ron say "NO" to such "excited", the metaphorical one, used predicatively, and tdol is mulling over...

The pudding doesn't look so tasty so far.

I agree. But if it's only you and I that make out the meaning, and it's not widely acceptable, I kind of hesitate to use it.

Are you sure on that one? I've tried Google search, and the results (the U.S area only) for "an excited man" are no less than 280.

When you first mentioned "excited" game, I could think of a context to place it in. After viewing your sentence, I would accept "excited game" in that metaphorical context. It is a bit of sports jargon, but it is understandable. On the other hand, I have no problem with "excited man/guy" in the right context. John is very happy about getting married to Jill. He is an excited guy.

Neither "exciting" nor "excitable" will work in that context. :wink:

[Taka]

Originally Posted by RonBee

Actually, 280 isn't very many. Try comparing that with "an exciting man" and see what you get.

In my opinion, that usage of "excited" is slang. It might catch on, but the nature of slang is that it tends to be temporary.

:)

Not too many, maybe. But enough to call it statistically significant, I think.

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

When you first mentioned "excited" game, I could think of a context to place it in. After viewing your sentence, I would accept "excited game" in that metaphorical context. It is a bit of sports jargon, but it is understandable. On the other hand, I have no problem with "excited man/guy" in the right context. John is very happy about getting married to Jill. He is an excited guy.

Neither "exciting" nor "excitable" will work in that context. :wink:

Mike sensei, where have you been?

I don't understand this part: "I could think of a context to place it in". Did you mean to say "I could not think of a context to place it in"?

Anyway, according to you Ron, Mike, it's a slang or a jargon in sports. So should I avoid such predicative usage in formal writing?

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Taka

Not too many, maybe. But enough to call it statistically significant, I think.

Mike sensei, where have you been?

I don't understand this part: "I could think of a context to place it in". Did you mean to say "I could not think of a context to place it in"?

Anyway, according to you Ron, Mike, it's a slang or a jargon in sports. So should I avoid such predicative usage in formal writing?

Yes, it should have been "could not".

I agree. That is not for formal writing. :wink:

[Taka]

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

I agree. That is not for formal writing. :wink:

OK.

What about the attributive one? Is it inappropriate for formal writing as well?

[RonBee]

Originally Posted by Taka

OK.

What about the attributive one? Is it inappropriate for formal writing as well?

It would depend on the context (as always). The phrase "excited man" would be fine in any context in which "excited" describes the man's attitude.

:)

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Taka

OK.

What about the attributive one? Is it inappropriate for formal writing as well?

I agree with Ron.

One can have an excited man or even an excited particle (in physics).