Comparison (grammar)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Positive (linguistics))
Jump to: navigation, search

Comparison is a feature in the grammar of some languages, whereby adjectives and adverbs are inflected or modified to produce forms which indicate the relative degree of the designated properties.

The grammatical category associated with comparison of adjectives and adverbs is degree of comparison. The usual degrees of comparison are the positive, which simply denotes a property (as with the English words big and fully); the comparative, which indicates greater degree (as bigger and more fully); and the superlative, which indicates greatest degree (as biggest and most fully).[1] Some languages have forms indicating a very large degree of a particular quality (called elative in Semitic linguistics).

Formation of comparatives and superlatives[edit]


Comparative and superlative constructions[edit]

Comparatives are often used with a conjunction or other grammatical means to indicate with what the comparison is being made, as with than in English, als in German, etc. In Russian this can be done by placing the compared noun in the genitive case. With superlatives, the class of things being considered for comparison may be indicated, as in the best swimmer out of all the girls.

Languages also possess other structures for comparing adjectives and adverbs; English examples include and less/least...'

Usage when considering only two things[edit]

In many languages, including English, traditional grammar requires the comparative form to be used when exactly two things are being considered, even in constructions where the superlative would be used when considering a larger number. For instance, May the better man win would be considered correct if there are only two individuals competing. However this rule is not always observed in informal usage; the form May the best man win will often be used in that situation, as it would if there were three or more competitors involved.[2]

Rhetorical use of unbalanced comparatives[edit]


For example:

  • Always!
  • Why pay more?
  • We work harder.
  • We sell for less!
  • More doctors recommend it.

Comparison in English[edit]

English, because of the complex etymology of its lexicon, has two parallel systems of comparison. One involves the suffixes -er (the "comparative") and -est (the "superlative"). These inflections are of Germanic origin, and are cognate with the Latin suffixes -ior and -issimus and even closer Ancient Greek -īōn and -istos. They are typically added to shorter words, words of Anglo-Saxon origin, and borrowed words that have been fully assimilated into the English vocabulary. Usually the words that take these inflections have fewer than three syllables. Despite these general trends, many adjectives can take either form, with different frequencies according to context. [3]

This system also contains a number of irregular forms, some of which, like good, better, best, contain suppletive forms. These irregular forms include:

Positive Comparative Superlative
good better best
well better best
bad worse worst
ill worse worst
far farther farthest
far further furthest
little smaller, less(er) smallest, least
many, much more most

More and most[edit]

The second system of comparison in English appends the grammatical particles more and most, themselves the irregular comparatives of many/much, to the adjective or adverb being modified. This series can be compared to a system containing the diminutives less and least.

This system is most commonly used with words of French or Latin derivation; adjectives and adverbs formed with suffixes other than -ly (e.g. beautiful); and with longer, technical, or infrequently used words. Knowing which words fall into which system is a highly idiomatic issue in English syntax. Some words require the suffixing system: e.g. taller is required; *more tall is not idiomatic English.

Some words (e.g. difficult) require more and most. Some words (e.g. polite) can be used with either system; curiously, while polite can go either way, the derived word impolite requires more and most.

The general rule is that words with one syllable require the suffix, words with three or more syllables require more or most and words with two syllables can go either way.

Absolute adjectives[edit]

A perennial issue in English usage involves the comparison of so-called "absolute" adjectives, also called ungradable adjectives, which logically do not seem to admit of comparison. There are many such adjectives — generally adjectives that name qualities that are either present or absent: nothing is *"more Cretaceous" or *"more igneous" than anything else.

Other examples include perfect, unique, and parallel, which name qualities that are inherently superlative: if something is perfect, there can be nothing better, so it does not make sense to describe one thing as *"more perfect" than something else; if something is unique, in the sense of "one of a kind",[4] something cannot be *"very unique", or *"more unique" than something else. See also tautology (rhetoric) and pleonasm.

In general, terms like perfect and parallel cannot ever apply exactly to things in real life, so they are commonly used to mean nearly perfect, nearly parallel, and so on; and in this (inexact) use, more perfect (i.e., more nearly perfect, closer to perfect) and more parallel (i.e., more nearly parallel, closer to parallel) do seem to make sense.[citation needed]

Comparison in Balto-Slavic languages[edit]

In most Balto-Slavic (such as Czech, Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian etc.) the comparative and superlative forms are also declinable adjectives. The exception is Russian.

See also[edit]


  3. ^ Romaine, Merja (21 June 2013). "Competing forms of adjective comparison in modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective?". 
  4. ^ For a sense of the word that could allow a qualifier, see J.D. Salinger. "For Esmé—With Love and Squalor". Retrieved 21 Feb 2013. : "And as I look back, it seems to me that we were fairly unique, the sixty of us, in that there wasn’t one good mixer in the bunch."