Sorry... My last post made no sense. Anyway, I don't have anything to talk about today, ether. Other than I realized the critical has the same quirk as with. You can see it here "Juhald was critical of the project", and "Juhald was critical to the project". See? Also, "The candle put out enough light to be unable to go to bed." and alternatively "I put out the candle so as to go to bed."
Another interesting point is that you can't combine these things. You couldn't, for example, say that a certain country fought with great courage, great adversity, and Great Britain. Or could you?
ReplyDeleteYou easily could, but it would mean ether that a very noble country was allied with Great Britain, or a country that was against Great Britain was trying to impair nobility (The noble kind, not the tyrannical kind).
DeleteOh, that's good! —And suggests the following:
Delete"How did they fight?"
"They fought with nobility."
"Whom did they fight?"
"They fought with nobility."
"Did they have any allies?"
"They fought with nobility."
Goodness, language can be versatile!
Or how about this one: "With the end of World War II and the subsequent beginning of the Cold War, the U.S. went from fighting with the Soviets to fighting with the Soviets."
ReplyDeleteThat's gazemazing and brilliant! You're so good at history.
DeleteWhy, thank you!
DeleteI love it! Both of you guys amaze me. I never think about these things, but you are so right.....
ReplyDeleteI never do either, on my own. But when El Madisonio hands me the ball, I try to run with it.
Delete