|
|
Saturday, July 08, 2006
This is usually the sort of question I answer, not ask, but...
What's wrong with "funner"?
I understand that you can't do the standard comparative and superlative endings (-er and -est) with adjectives that are
1) past participles - loved, hated, tired, eaten, worn
2) present participles - loving, hating, tiring, trying
3) Latinate present active participles - important, existent, dependent
4) noun derivatives whose endings make them adjectives - spatial and spacious (space), special and specious (species), famous (fame), original (origin)
Of course there are more, but this gives quick access to tons of adjectives that form their comparative and superlative with more and most and of which you might not ordinarily think. The problem is:
"fun" is a nice little three-letter word.
Thinking in terms of euphonics, its closest analog is "thin" - consonant-vowel-"n". With "thin" you have to double the "n" in "thinner" and "thinnest" to maintain the short "i," but we do. And those who make the mistake with "fun" usually understand how this works:
I've seen people write "funner" but never "funer."
So, if ordinary folks who don't know better than to say "funner" know all the other stuff involved in forming a proper "incorrect" word, just what is wrong with "funner"?
Should you know, please put finger to keyboard and send an explanation. Could there be a funner challenge to take on over the weekend?
posted by gbarto at 3:02 PM
|
Archives
|
