[Grammar] It was so cold that I had to stay home.

[Mike MC]

Are the following sentences correct? If so, do they mean the same?

• It was so cold that I had to stay home.
• It was cold, so that I had to stay home.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

Sentence 2 is not grammatical so it's a redundant question.

 

[Mike MC]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

Sentence 2 is not grammatical so it's a redundant question.

I wonder what's the difference between sentence 2 and the following:

"My suitcase had become damaged, so that the lid would not stay closed."
COBUILD English Grammar, fourth edition, page 394

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

I wonder [STRIKE]what's[/STRIKE] what the difference between sentence 2 and the following is.

"My suitcase had become damaged, so that the lid would not stay closed."

Cobuild English Grammar, fourth edition, page 394

With all due respect to the writers of that book, that's a very unnatural sentence (in BrE, at least). I would use either:

My suitcase had become so damaged that the lid would not stay closed.
My suitcase had become damaged so the lid would not stay closed.

 

[PaulMatthews]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

Are the following sentences correct? If so, do they mean the same?

• It was so cold that I had to stay home.
• It was cold, so that I had to stay home.

[1] It was [so cold that I had to stay home].
[2] It was cold [so that I had to stay home].

Yes: you can, though the meanings are slightly different. In [1] it was the degree of coldness that caused you to stay at home, whereas in [2] it was simply the fact that it was cold. Note that in 2 we would more naturally say "It was cold so I had to stay home".

The grammar is different, too. If you’re interested, here’s why:

In [1] the bracketed element is an adjective phrase containing headed by the adjective “cold”, which has the underlined subordinate clause as its complement. Although the complement follows the head adjective, “cold”, it is not the adjective that licenses (specifically permits or requires) it but the adverb “so” that modifies “cold”.

In [2], by contrast, the bracketed element is a preposition phrase headed by the prep “so” with the underlined subordinate clause as its complement. Unlike the subordinate clause in [1], the preposition phrase is not a complement but an adjunct of result. It gives the result or consequence of it being cold.

 

[jutfrank]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

It was cold so I had to stay home. :tick:
It was cold so that I had to stay home. :cross:

My suitcase had become damaged, so that the lid would not stay closed.
=
My suitcase had become damaged in such a way that the lid would not stay closed.

 

[Mike MC]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

I wonder [STRIKE]what's[/STRIKE]what the difference between sentence 2 and the following is.

Thanks for the answer! As an aside, is it wrong to say C is the difference between A and B?

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

Interesting. I still find "so that" in sentence 2 very unnatural and, if one of my students used it, I'd strike out "that". For me, it should read "My suitcase had been damaged, so the lid wouldn't close", as an alternative way of saying "My suitcase had become damaged. Consequently, the lid wouldn't close".

 

[PaulMatthews]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

I don't find the analysis of so as a preposition helpful. Even Huddleston, a great advocate of an expanded preposition class says that in such sentences so that falls at the boundary between coordinators and prepositions (prepositions that take clausal complements thus subordinating conjunctions in a traditional analysis. They lack the more positive features of each, so that their classification remains problematic.

(Hudddleston and Pullum (2002.1321), The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP)

If you look at my answer, you' ll see that I only mentioned the grammar on an "if interested" basis. I don't think that nit-picking about the part of speech of "so" is helpful to the OP.

 

[PaulMatthews]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

My response was to the "If you’re interested" part of your post. I assume that anybody who was not interested would not even bother reading my response.

I'm surprised you bothered.

In any cae, it is perfectly OK to classify "so" as a prep. in that example.

 

[Rover_KE]

Re: Can we use "adjective + so that" instead of "so + adjective + that"?

Thread closed by Rover_KE.