THE PROBLEM OF THE NUMBER OF FORMS OF DEGREES OF COMPARISON

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 483.

Opinions differ on the number of degrees of comparison adjectives have. Traditionally we point out three basic forms though some scholars claim there are only two.

O. Jespersen, for example, writes: "From a formal point of view we have two degrees of comparison in adjectives and adverbs, namely, Comparative and Superlative. The regular way of forming them is by adding the endings -er and -est to the ground-form, which is called Positive" [13, 219]. Thus, he denies the fact that the first form in the paradigm expresses any idea of comparison.

We do not agree with this point of view as we consider that even the positive degree expresses not only 'quality proper' but 'comparison' as well. Here are some arguments:

1) in the example below the reader vividly feels the increase of the degree of hotness / coldness though grammatically it is not expressed.

e. g. The water ran cold, then after the whoomph! as the jets caught, lukewarm, then at lastwarm (Naipaul).

So it is logical to suppose that in the semantic structure of qualitative adjectives there exists the seme of comparison.

2) let us analyze the meaning (semantic structure) of the positive degree of comparison in the sentences He is placid and He is irritable. In different contexts they mean different things:

I. placid (He is placid).

1. He is more placid than his neighbour.

2. He is more placid than he was yesterday.

3. He is the most placid of the three.

4. He is less irritable than his neighbour.

5. He is less irritable than he was yesterday.

6. He is the least irritable of all my friends.

7. He isplacid rather than irritable.

8. He is as placid asyesterday.

9. He isnot so irritable as I imagined.

10. He isnot irritable.

11. He is placid, though less placid than his brother.

12. He is placid, thoughthe least placid of all in the family.

13. He is placid, though he is more irritable than me.

14. He is placid now, though he is usuallyirritable.

II. irritable (He is irritable).

1. He ismore irritable than his neighbour.

2. He ismore irritable than he was yesterday.

3. He is the most irritable of the three.

4. He is less placid than his neighbour.

5. He is less placid than he was yesterday.

6. He is the least placid of all my friends.

7. He is irritable rather than placid.

8. He isas irritable asyesterday.

9. He is not so placid as I imagined.

10. He isnot placid.

11. He is irritable, though less irritable than his brother.

12. He is irritable, thoughthe least irritableof all in the family.

13. He is irritable, though he ismore placid than me.

14. He is irritable now, though he is usuallyplacid.

The semantic structure of the positive degree of comparison reveals the complete paradigm of comparison including "direct" and "reverse" comparison:

I. the least ― less ― placid ― more ― the most

placid placid placid placid

| | | | |

irritable* ― more ― not ― less ― the least

irritable irritable irritable irritable

II. the least ― less ― irritable― more ― the most

irritable irritable irritable irritable

| | | | |

placid* ― more ― not ― less ― the least

placid placid placid placid

Thus, the positive degree contains the semantics of comparison.

3) there is no sense in the phrase The mouse is big if there are no bigger or smaller mice. To conclude that The elephant is small one should compare it with other representatives of the same class. So the positive degree is not always the starting point but is also the result of comparison.

The comparative and superlative degrees are relative in meaning. In the example Peter is older than Mary Peter may be very young, the comparative form older only indicates that Peter possesses more of the quality 'being of a certain age' than Mary. The same phenomenon can be traced in the example Peter is the oldest boy in the group. Peter is not advanced in years, but among the members of the same group he possesses the greatest amount of this quality. On the basis of all this A.I. Smirnitsky speaks only of two forms of comparison: the positive degree and the relative degree which in its turn is built up of the comparative and superlative degrees.

To present a decent explanation he takes the adjective long and claims that long, longer and longest denote one and the same concrete quality, namely – the quality of length. But long expresses it irrespective of its relation to the same quality (length) in other objects (in other words, it contains no comparison). In case with longer the quality is shown in comparison with the same quality in some other object. The form longest presupposes that the object characterized by the given quality is compared with the whole class of things possessing the same quality, and among them it appears to have the highest degree of it.