There was a large crowd in front of(before) the City Hall?

[engee30]

I am not a teacher.

A man and his wife are drinking at a bar. The drunk next to them cuts loose a fart. Outraged, the man says to the drunk, "How dare you fart before my wife?" The drunk replies, "Shorry, buddy---*hic*---I didn't know it wazh her turn."

:lol:
Just as a reminder - the initial question was:

Why can't you use before in the below? Is "below" always for figurative places, never for concrete positions?
ex)There was a large crowd in front of(before) the City Hall.

In my opinion, we're not supposed to be talking about whether before is ambiguous or not, whether it is archaic or not, whether it's formal or not. There was no such question asked. But since we're actually doing this, it is true that it's archaic, ambiguous, and formal.
The question posed by the OP was straightforward, and the answer by me was the same. So if someone believes firmly that before cannot be used in that sentence and is not acceptable because before is ambiguous, archaic and formal, go ahead saying so - those reading such discussions will certainly draw a conclusion of their own.

 

[Coolfootluke]

:lol:
Just as a reminder - the initial question was:


In my opinion, we're not supposed to be talking about whether before is ambiguous or not, whether it is archaic or not, whether it's formal or not. There was no such question asked. But since we're actually doing this, it is true that it's archaic, ambiguous, and formal.
The question posed by the OP was straightforward, and the answer by me was the same. So if someone believes firmly that before cannot be used in that sentence and is not acceptable because before is ambiguous, archaic and formal, go ahead saying so - those reading such discussions will certainly draw a conclusion of their own.

I guess you are right to scold me for being thick (especially when seconded by the Very Right bhaisahab) because I don't know what you're driving at. You seem to think that someone can say what we are supposed to be talking about, whoever "we" are. My intention is to give the OP the completest possible picture of the current state of "before" vs. "in front of". If the original question must be cleaved to, it was whether or not it was correct, and if you want my opinion, and birdeen called for opinions, "before" is incorrect for "in front of" in modern literal contexts. May I state the reasons?

 

[birdeen's call]

In my opinion, we're not supposed to be talking about whether before is ambiguous or not, whether it is archaic or not, whether it's formal or not. There was no such question asked.

We must warn askers when we're giving them forms that are used only in specific circumstances. It doesn't matter whether the asker asks how the form is used. They don't have to know what to ask. You did that yourself in your post--you said the usage of "before" was formal. And you were right to do so if you had a strong conviction it was indeed formal.

I believed and still believe this usage shouldn't be called formal but archaic. Again, it's worth mentioning if it really is so. In that case, it wouldn't be good if the OP understood they can or should use "before" instead of "in front of" in a formal letter to their boss.

You seem to be saying that this discussion shouldn't have taken place (we're not supposed to be talking about...) and I disagree.

 

[engee30]

[...] because I don't know what you're driving at.

This is what I am driving at:

[...] so I do not see the point in saying it is acceptable to people trying to learn conversational English.

and now this:

[...] "before" is incorrect for "in front of" in modern literal contexts.

 

[engee30]

You seem to be saying that this discussion shouldn't have taken place (we're not supposed to be talking about...) and I disagree.

That's not what I meant to achieve through those words of mine, birdeen's call. :roll:

If someone keeps on saying that what is archaic cannot be used, I'm lost for words. End of discussion on my part in this thread.

 

[birdeen's call]

That's not what I meant to achieve through those words of mine, birdeen's call. :roll:

But that's how I understood you. I would be glad to know what you meant.

If someone keeps on saying that what is archaic cannot be used, I'm lost for words. End of discussion on my part in this thread.

It's your right to end your participation any time you want.

Nobody is saying that what is archaic cannot be used. I'm the last person to say this kind of thing. (I see however that some (two) things I said here could be understood this way. I should have said clearly what I think of this, but I simply didn't notice that possible implication of my words.) Archaisms can be used, but should be used consciously in the right cirumstances. It is important to know archaic from non-archaic.

 

[mayita1usa]

Keannu, are you still there? Did your question get answered?

 

[keannu]

Keannu, are you still there? Did your question get answered?

There seem to be two oppsite sides for this question making me more confused. So are American teachers saying "before" is mainly for abstract, metaphorical, figurative positions with a few exceptions while "in front of" is concrete, physical position? I can't help but conclude like this.

 

[mayita1usa]

There seem to be two oppsite sides for this question making me more confused.

I was afraid of that!

So are American teachers saying "before" is mainly for abstract, metaphorical, figurative positions with a few exceptions while "in front of" is concrete, physical position?

No, I don't think that's the main idea. Here is my summary:

- In front of is a preposition that almost always refers to spatial/physical location.

- Before has multiple meanings*, including a preposition of spatial/physical location; however, this usage is less common in current American English, particularly spoken English. *Before | Define Before at Dictionary.com

Thus, your original sentence is technically correct, but might sound a little strange to some modern ears:

There was a large crowd in front of (before) the City Hall.

All that being said, to be perfectly honest, I think this sentence would be just fine if you removed "the" and added some more context:
There was a large crowd before City Hall awating the mayor's announcement.

This may be formal, but it doesn't sound at all "archaic" to me...!

 

[keannu]

There was a large crowd before City Hall awating the mayor's announcement.
By this, do you mean before has a physical meaning? I guess according to all the arguments including yours so far, it means one of the followings. Maybe "in front of" only in the sense of figurative symbol of "city hall", that's why you removed "the" to get rid of the nuance of physical location. You didn't specify what it actually means. I guess it's a symbolic connotation. I'm sorry I'm still not hundred percent clear about this.



*in front of; ahead of; in advance of: his shadow advancing before him; She stood before the window.
*in the presence or sight of: to appear before an audience.

 

[mayita1usa]

There was a large crowd before City Hall awaiting the mayor's announcement.
By this, do you mean before has a physical meaning?

Yes!

Maybe "in front of" only in the sense of figurative symbol of "city hall", that's why you removed "the" to get rid of the nuance of physical location.

No! I'm sorry I wasn't clear.

1 - I removed "the" because it's not correct with "before" or "in front of". City Hall - with capital letters - is the name of the building, and you don't need "the". (That's a topic for a different thread!)

2 - I added the additional context (awaiting the mayor's announcement) because it takes the emphasis away from "before", and makes it sound a little more natural. Again, it has nothing to do with the use of "before"; I thought it might help other readers get my point.

My final word: I consider "before" to be an appropriate synonym for "in front of" (a preposition of spatial/physical location) in these sentences.
- There was a large crowd before City Hall.
- There was a large crowd before the city hall.

Sorry if others still disagree!

 

[birdeen's call]

Thanks, mayita, for both bringing us back to topic and for your opinion. I was almost sure every native speaker would see it as archaic.

 

[mayita1usa]

Thanks, mayita, for both bringing us back to topic and for your opinion. I was almost sure every native speaker would see it as archaic.

You're welcome (and I hope we finally helped Keannu)!
Formal? Yes.
Archaic? No, no yet!

 

[la_patata]

It really depends on the level of the student, any student reading English literature will certainly come across "before" used to mean "in front of". As all levels of student use this site, I think it is good to impart any knowledge we have about the language.

That is my point - I haven't written about not to tell them... But still, it is literature etc., so there's no point encouraging students to use it themselves.

 

[mayita1usa]

Re: There was a large crowd in front of (before) the City Hall?

That is my point - I haven't written about not to tell them... But still, it is literature etc., so there's no point encouraging students to use it themselves.

I couldn't disagree more... I think students should be encouraged to use as much of the language as they are able to master! Who are we to decide what level of language they use? It is up to us teachers to help them reach their potential, not limit it!

Also, at the risk of repeating myself yet again, "before" as a preposition of place is NOT just used in "literature"! Here is just one example I found after a 5-second Google search:

"And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a divided house to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for President of the United States." [Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's Announcement Speech, Saturday, February 10, 2007. The Washington Post.]

​

Could Obama have said "I stand in front of you today"? Yes.
Is the connotation slightly different? Yes.

"Before", in my opinion, adds a quality of "in body and spirit", rather than just the physical.
Maybe this is what Keannu was trying to point out or ask in the first place!

 

[birdeen's call]

Re: There was a large crowd in front of (before) the City Hall?

But, if I may, this one refers to standing in front a group of people. I think we were discussing "before" used with other nouns. We all agree, I think, that "before a judge" or "before you" is still used in appropriate contexts. Keannu asked recently about "before a judge" and no one corrected my answer that it's perfectly normal. But several people didn't like it in "before a villa".

I'm not sure now we have all been discussing the same thing. Do you consider "before a villa" no less modern than "before you", mayita?

I'm sorry if I'm being tedious.

PS: I just found something that seems to support my view.

 

[mykwyner]

Are you kidding me? Is my pickup truck parked before my house? Is there a line of customers before the store?

If I used sentences like that, any native English speaker would look at me like I just stepped out of a flying saucer. Yes, we stand before a judge, and Obama's speech sounded natural, but freely substituting before for in front of in other usages is usually non-idiomatic.

 

[birdeen's call]

Mykwyner, I also don't think "before" can be freely substituted for "in front of" (without sounding odd and leading to misunderstandings). The problem is to specify when it can be done, that is in what contexts, with what kinds of nouns. They haven't been defined clearly in this thread yet; only some examples have been given.

PS: I just thought that actually some clear definitions had been given, and what I'd just written could have sounded belittling. I'm sorry about it. It's just that I'm still unsure about this.

 

[5jj]

38 posts and still people are unhappy.

Here is my BrE contribution, for what it's worth - if anything.

I would not go as far as labelling 'before' archaic, but it is pretty formal, In normal conversation it wold be very unusual with buildings, and sometimes wrong/confusing - see SoothingDave's post #7.

I think part of the problem started with engee's first response, "Such use is considered formal by some. And of course it's correct." In the original sentence, There was a large crowd before/in front of the City Hall, 'before' is not really formal; it is unnatural; in that particular sentence I would go so far as to say it is not 'correct'.

Yes, if we are formal, we stand before a judge, a Senate committee, an audience, a congregation, etc, but we do NOT park our car before our house, and crowds do not normally stand before City Hall.

Dictionaries, rightly, list this meanng of 'before' because, in the past, it was used with places meaning 'in front of'; indeed it may well still be used in this way by some writers. Advanced students should certainly be made aware of this.

However, to suggest to most learners that 'before' is correct or natural in the original sentence is unhelpful.

if you look back through the thread, you will not find one native speaker who feels that it is natural in normal modern English.

 

[birdeen's call]

I'm happy now, because your post, 5jj, expresses my opinion too, and better than I managed to do. I only want to say why I think using "before" with buildings is not only unnatural but also archaic. I simply found examples of such usage in older texts.