Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Seiichi MYOGA is offline Junior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Japanese
      • Home Country:
      • Japan
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default relatively small

    Hi,
    Please compare the two sentences below.

    (1) The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not a horse).
    (2) The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not a mouse).

    My bet is:
    (1) works but (2) doesn't.
    Do you agree?

    Thank you in advance
    Seiichi MYOGA

    The intended meaning is that the creature I saw was the same size as a dog (but not a horse/mouse). Please tell us if it is better to put "and ( or but)" before "not" in (1) and (2).

  2. #2
    Raymott's Avatar
    Raymott is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    19,548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Quote Originally Posted by Seiichi MYOGA View Post
    Hi,
    Please compare the two sentences below.

    (1) The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not a horse).
    (2) The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not a mouse).

    My bet is:
    (1) works but (2) doesn't.
    Do you agree?

    Thank you in advance
    Seiichi MYOGA

    The intended meaning is that the creature I saw was the same size as a dog (but not a horse/mouse). Please tell us if it is better to put "and ( or but)" before "not" in (1) and (2).
    Neither of your sentences works.
    First, "no bigger than" doesn't mean "as big as". It means "as big as, or smaller than - but not bigger."
    If the creature is no bigger than a dog, it follows that it's no bigger than a horse. In any case, "(not a horse)" or "(not a mouse)" doesn't make sense with that sentence.

    If the creature is the same size as a dog, it's entirely unnecessary to list any other animals that it is the same size as (or indeed that it is not the size of) unless you need to say what size of dog it is the same size as (since the size of dogs varies widely).

  3. #3
    Seiichi MYOGA is offline Junior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Japanese
      • Home Country:
      • Japan
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Dear Raymott,
    I appreciate your help and comments.

    What do you think of (i)?

    (i)
    Recent evidence indicates that Homo erectus probably took no more than 100000 years, not the million yearspreviously thought, to reach Java from Africa. (T. W. Wallbank, Civilization Past and Present)

    Seiichi MYOGA

    What I want is something like (i).
    How about this?
    The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not the size of a horse/*mouse I had expected it to be).


    Last edited by Seiichi MYOGA; 25-Jul-2012 at 16:46.

  4. #4
    5jj's Avatar
    5jj is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    28,168
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Quote Originally Posted by Seiichi MYOGA View Post
    (i) Recent evidence indicates that Homo erectus probably took no more than 100,000 years, not the million years previously thought, to reach Java from Africa. (T. W. Wallbank, Civilization Past and Present).
    That's fine.
    Please do not edit your question after it has received a response. Such editing can make the response hard for others to understand.


  5. #5
    BobK's Avatar
    BobK is offline Harmless drudge
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    15,474
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Quote Originally Posted by Seiichi MYOGA View Post
    ...
    ...Seiichi MYOGA

    What I want is something like (i).
    How about this?
    The creature I saw was no bigger than a dog (not the size of a horse/*mouse I had expected it to be).


    As Raymott explained the parenthesis makes little or no sense there. You could arrange the sentence like this:
    The creature I saw was not the size of a horse (as I had expected it to be); it was no bigger than a dog.
    b

  6. #6
    Seiichi MYOGA is offline Junior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Japanese
      • Home Country:
      • Japan
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Dear 5jj and BobK

    I appreciate your help and comments.



    The creature I saw was not the size of a horse (as I had expected it to be); it was no bigger than a dog.
    This is something I have wanted. Thank you, BobK. In my observation, X in "no bigger than X" means not just something small (as in "as small as X") but something relatively small (small compared with something else). I wanted to have an example sentence that makes this idea clear to learners of English. Now I think you'd agree that (3) doesn't work.

    (3)*The creature I saw was not the size of a dog (as I had expected it to be); it was no bigger than a horse.

    Seiichi MYOGA
    As for "no more than 100,000 years, not the million years previously thought," we can use "not" to introduce a contrast between "100,000 years" and "(one) million years." Why is it that the same doesn't hold true for "no bigger than"? That's a mystery.


  7. #7
    Barb_D's Avatar
    Barb_D is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    17,125
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    You are right. Number 3 doesn't work at all!
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

  8. #8
    Seiichi MYOGA is offline Junior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Japanese
      • Home Country:
      • Japan
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Dear Barb_D,

    I appreciate your help and comments.

    Seiichi MYOGA

  9. #9
    5jj's Avatar
    5jj is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    28,168
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    As for "no more than 100,000 years, not the million years previously thought," we can use "not" to introduce a contrast between "100,000 years" and "(one) million years." Why is it that the same doesn't hold true for "no bigger than"? That's a mystery.
    If you change the word order of either sentence, you'll see that they have the same construction:

    It was not the million years previous thought; it was no more than 100,000 years
    The creature was not the size of a horse; it was no bigger than a dog.

    It was no more than 100,000 years, not the million years previously thought.
    It was no bigger than a dog, not the size of a horse.
    Last edited by Barb_D; 31-Jul-2012 at 13:05. Reason: Fixed a wee bitty typo
    Please do not edit your question after it has received a response. Such editing can make the response hard for others to understand.


  10. #10
    Seiichi MYOGA is offline Junior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Japanese
      • Home Country:
      • Japan
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: relatively small

    Dear 5jj,

    I appreciate your help and comments.

    I like this one most because it best serves our purpose (in that it is easiest for learners to make sense of).
    Quote Originally Posted by 5jj View Post
    It was no bigger than a dog, not the size of a horse.
    Now I think we have finally completed a triplet.
    (i) a. The creature was no bigger than a dog/horse. (with there being no overt comparison)
    b. The creature was no bigger than a dog, not the size of a horse. (with a comparison explicitly stated)
    c.*The creature was no bigger than a horse, not the size of a dog. (with the wrong comparison resulting in unacceptability).

    Now do you agree?

    Seiichi MYOGA
    I had thought the comma and parentheses could work the same way here. I don't know why something like "The creature was no bigger than a dog (not the size of a horse)" can't receive the same acceptance, but it might be better to leave it at that for now.
    Last edited by Seiichi MYOGA; 01-Aug-2012 at 02:17.

Similar Threads

  1. [Vocabulary] Small park? Square? Small public garden?
    By englishhobby in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 20-Jan-2012, 01:08
  2. in no small way
    By Cynthia Garett in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-Oct-2010, 14:49
  3. little/small
    By thru in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16-Feb-2007, 11:08
  4. small help
    By nouna in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-Feb-2007, 05:11
  5. small or little
    By vpflower in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-May-2006, 23:19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •