My old boring teacher and a young intelligent woman

[Glizdka]

I believe different positions of adjectives can allow us to convey different messages while using the same words. The following are my own sentences. Could you please tell me if they're correct, and if I'm right?

Old can describe the age of said teacher, their seniority; it's the antonym of young. Old can also determine which teacher it is; it describes their position in a sequence of teachers, the antonym of new.

---

A) My teacher is boring. My teacher is old. My boring old teacher gives us a lot of homework nobody wants to do. I wish we had a different teacher.
B) My previous teacher was boring. My new teacher is not. My old boring teacher gave us a lot of homework nobody wanted to do. Luckily, we have a new interesting teacher.

---

I'm not sure if intelligent can allow for a similar thing. It feels like it could be either an opinion or a trait.

---

C) Sally is an intelligent young woman (just my opinion).
D) Sally is a young intelligent woman (it's her distinguishing quality).

 

[Tarheel]

"My old boring teacher" seems to suggest that that person was replaced by a new boring teacher. You might say, "My old (previous) teacher was boring and gave everybody too much homework." That presumably is a comparison with the new teacher, who is more fun and interesting.

 

[jutfrank]

You're basically on the right lines.

A) and C) are correct and follow the standard positioning rules. (I hope people know from the other thread about adverbs what I mean by 'standard'.)

B) is odd, precisely because it does not follow the rules. You'd need a special reason to veer from the rules. Your reason qualifies.

D) is also non-standard. I don't quite understand your reason, though. What's the distinguishing feature? Young or intelligent?

 

[Glizdka]

I hope people know from the other thread about adverbs what I mean by 'standard'

I'd consulted Cambridge Dictionary. Is that a good source?

 

[jutfrank]

In this case, Cambridge Dictionary is pretty much right, yes. I could quibble about some of the categories they use, but I won't.

I wouldn't normally suggest consulting a dictionary for advice on grammar.

 

[Glizdka]

D) is also non-standard. I don't quite understand your reason, though. What's the distinguishing feature? Young or intelligent?

I'd say young is more of a type/kind—a young woman, as opposed to a fully-grown woman and an elderly woman. Would that make young non-gradable?

Intelligent is her feature, something that distinguishes her from other young women.

I think there's a difference between how "an intelligent young woman" and "a young intelligent woman" feel.

In C, "a young, intelligent woman," both young and intelligent feel like her features. Would the comma be correct?

 

[GoesStation]

I think there's a difference between how "an intelligent young woman" and "a young intelligent woman" feel.

It's a matter of priority.

An intelligent young woman:a young woman who is intelligent.

A young intelligent woman: an intelligent woman who is young.

In C, "a young, intelligent woman," both young and intelligent feel like her features. Would the comma be correct?

With the comma, it describes a woman who has both attributes with little emphasis on one or the other.

 

[jutfrank]

I'd say young is more of a type/kind—a young woman, as opposed to a fully-grown woman and an elderly woman.

Yes, you're thinking in the right way. This is a complex area, but basically, the modifier that 'wants' to go closest to the noun is the one that identifies type. On the Cambridge page, I see they've listed 'type' and 'purpose' as two distinct categories, and which I find dubious.

Would that make young non-gradable?

That's a good question, the asking of which makes me think you're understanding this correctly, so I'll say yes. As you rightly observe, type is not a gradable category.

Intelligent is her feature, something that distinguishes her from other young women.

I see. Yes, exactly. Another way to say that is that intelligent is a descriptive modifier.

I think there's a difference between how "an intelligent young woman" and "a young intelligent woman" feel.

Oh, yes, that's for sure. It's very good that you can feel that. Your sensitivity is impressive, young padwan. :up: (Though I imagine they both 'feel' quite good. Heh heh. ;-))

In C, "a young, intelligent woman," both young and intelligent feel like her features. Would the comma be correct?

I can't comment on what this means because you're the one who said it, not me. You could explain it in the same way as above but in reverse—young is descriptive and intelligent is typic, but it seems you're saying that's not what you mean. What we can say is that in both cases (both ways round), the first of the two adjectives is descriptive and the second could either be typic or descriptive, depending on what you mean, of course. It's quite a lot harder to imagine intelligent referring to type, however.

 

[Glizdka]

Is young in young padawan also non-gradable?

---

Are these correct?

E) My teacher teaches geography. My teacher comes from France. It's my French geography teacher.
F) My teacher teaches English. My teacher comes from France. It's my French English teacher.

G) It's a dictionary. It's about Old (Anglo-Saxon) English. It's an Old English dictionary.
H) It's a dictionary. It's about English. It's old. It's an old English dictionary.

 

[jutfrank]

No to the young padawan question. Yes to the second question.

 

[Glizdka]

No to the young padawan question. Yes to the second question.

Young padawan feels somewhat similar to a rookie, an amateur, a noob, as opposed to a senior padawan, who's already mastered most of the things a padawan's expected to master before they are [STRIKE]knighted[/STRIKE]jedied.

Or maybe it's just me, not knowing the ways of jedies, as I've never watched a single Star Wars movie. Probably that.

 

[jutfrank]

All padawans are young, relatively speaking. I'm not sure how long padawanship typically takes before full jedification. I'll ask at the next council meeting.

 

[Tarheel]

A French geography teacher seems to me to be someone who teaches French geography (and no other). As for a French English teacher, I have to ask what French English is.

You have got to be going for humor with those.
:-D

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I'd say young is more of a type/kind—a young woman, as opposed to a fully-grown woman and an elderly woman. Would that make young non-gradable?

I think of young women as fully-grown. Girls are not fully-grown.

Intelligent is her feature, something that distinguishes her from other young women.

I think there's a difference between how "an intelligent young woman" and "a young intelligent woman" feel.

The first sounds more natural to me, but I'm picturing the same person either way. What do you think the difference is? Emphasis? Focus? (I just got focus from Jut, in another thread.)

In C, "a young, intelligent woman," both young and intelligent feel like her features. Would the comma be correct?

The comma is a definite improvement, yes. (A comma would not be good with intelligent young woman.) They are her features, but they're her features the other way around, too, aren't they?

This is interesting.