| Welcome Guest | Forum Search | Active Topics | Members | |
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 2/17/2015
Posts: 531
Neurons: 2,938
|
(1) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup without the original lid is valuable.
(2) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup is valuable without the original lid.
Which sentence sounds more natural to native speakers? Thanks.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 969
Neurons: 9,862
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
|
The two sound equally natural, but there is a very slight difference in meaning/emphasis between them.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 29,159
Neurons: 167,591
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
|
I agree - both sentences sound OK.
(1) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup without the original lid is valuable.
This says
a. the cup does not have its original lid
b. The collector is not sure whether it's a valuable cup.
(2) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup is valuable without the original lid.
a. the cup may or may not have its original lid right now
b. it is likely that the 'cup and lid' pair would be valuable
c. the collector is not sure whether the cup alone would be valuable.
Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/16/2015
Posts: 1,890
Neurons: 352,628
|
robjen wrote:(1) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup without the original lid is valuable.
(2) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup is valuable without the original lid.
Which sentence sounds more natural to native speakers? Thanks. __________________In my view, sentence 1 is better than the first. Both may sound OK, but the first places the phrase "without the original lid" immediately after the noun it is related to.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 9,047
Neurons: 48,490
|
robjen wrote:(1) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup without the original lid is valuable.
(2) The new collector is not sure if the antique cup is valuable without the original lid.
Which sentence sounds more natural to native speakers? Thanks. I agree that both sound good, but to me #2 sounds a bit more natural, because it says the collector is not sure the cup has value, then explains why. But there isn't anything wrong with #1. It really depends on what the speaker is focusing on when saying this.
A great many people will think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. ~ William James ~
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/4/2015
Posts: 943
Neurons: 347,233
Location: Vinton, Iowa, United States
|
These sentences mean 2 different things. Which is "more natural" depends entirely on the intended meaning.
1- The placement of "without the lid" sounds to be identifying which cup we're talking about. That lid, over there, the one without the lid -- I don't know if that is valuable or not.
2- The placement of "without the lid" now is questioning the value of an incomplete object -- a cup without its lid. We know the value of the cup when it has a lid, but when the lid is absent, the value may be greatly diminished, as if often the case.
So, each sentence is completely natural. The appropriate sentence depends entirely on the intended meaning. I have used both variations myself, depending on the circumstances. So once again, without the context, the original question cannot be answered.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 29,159
Neurons: 167,591
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
|
Yes - the way Wilmar has written it shows the difference (to me) quite clearly.
"the antique cup without the original lid" is a noun-phrase.
In this phrase, "without the original lid" is a preposition phrase, acting as an adjective, and defines 'cup'.
"is valuable without the original lid" is a verb-phrase.
In this phrase, "without the original lid" is a preposition phrase, acting as an adverb of condition or circumstance.
It says which circumstances make the collector uncertain.
Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
|
|
|
Guest |