Re: Whence this form?

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:07:12 -0700, Jerry Friedman wrote:

Where is it written that parts linked by "rather than" have to
match? /Garner's Modern American Usage/ (which I found on Amazon)
says on p. 670, "/Rather than/. This phrase can function either as a
/conjunction/ or as a /preposition/. As a conjunction (the more common
use), /rather than/ demands that the constructions on each side of it
be parallel: 'If we can, we will solve this problem diplomatically
/rather than/ forcibly.' But as a preposition, /rather than/ can
connect non-parallel constructions: '/Rather than/ staying home on a
Saturday night, we went out to six different bars.'"

So Garner, with whom I occasionally disagree (as I do here), says. But
Bernstein (_The Careful Writer_) notes this:

"If we start from the premise that in this phrase ['rather than']
'than' is a conjunction, modified by 'rather', an adverb, we must
conclude that grammatically the elements linked by the conjunction
should be parallel . . . . There is [a] . . . trend in usage,
however, toward treating 'rather than' as a prepositional group. . . .
Thus we get the idiomatic, though not entirely grammatical,
constructions exemplified in the following sentences . . . ."

So the choice to treat "rather than" prepositionally is, as Bernstein
puts it, "idiom over grammar".

Now that would all be very well did the idiom express something,
connotation or denotation, that the grammatical casting does not, or if
the grammatical casting were somehow manifestly infelicitous, or if the
idiom had assumed the form called "cast-iron". But none of those is the
case. The classically grammatical form is clear, comprehensible to all,
as concise as the other, and an awfully long way away from being
universal practice.

I repeat that--

"We can stop rather than continue."
"We can stop instead of continuing."

--are both sound, while--

"We can stop rather than continuing."
"We can stop instead of continue."

--are both unsound.

Here's a sentence on doublespeak that he quotes (without commenting on
the grammar) on p. 268:

"It is language that conceals or prevents thought; rather than
extending thought, doublespeak limits it."

That is part of a long-ish (for the context) quotation on a completely
unrelated matter; I would have been surprised by any comment on its
grammar or style unless the thing was a true grotesquerie. In any event,
Garner has staked out his position: "rather than" can at times be
conceived as prepositional. It is perhaps noteworthy that Garner offers
no least comment on when or why one might see the phrase one way as
opposed to the other. He quotes Vladimir Nabokov, an excellent stylist,
for an example of parallelism properly brought off, then adds the
throwaway observation "Many modern writers would make that &c &c."

I don't see any way to write that so the parts match.

"Rather than extend thought, doublespeak acts to limit it."

More felicitous castings are doubtless possible, but that meets the need.

[skip to related follow-up posting]

Not in Garner, but I see Wilson Follett recommends "The lecture adds
much to the required reading rather than repeats it."

(As opposed to "The lecture adds much to the required reading rather than
repeating it."

That sounds terrible to me. . . .

Follett was noting a correction necessary to the thought as originally
cast, which is a different animal from recommending the correct form as
the best way of expressing the ideas in it. Something along the lines of
"The lecture adds much to rather than repeats the required reading,"
might do. Or, if that is not yet suitably felicitous, other arrangements
can be made; but at least it is grammatical and readily comprehensible.
(And try that with "repeating" if you want something that really sounds
terrible.)

I feel that, at bottom, the governing principle in choosing between
interpreting "rather than" conjunctively or prepositionally is Walker's
Law of Least Cervical Displacement. For those not yet acquainted with
it, it states that in choosing between alternative castings, each of
which is--at least in some quarters--defensible, the form that will cause
the fewest heads to snap up on reading it is the preferred form.

If, as I posit, the casting--

"Hopefully, we can do it during this generation rather than continue
to be distracted by the endless, well-funded parade of software tools."

--would cause no necks to be snapped, whereas the casting--

"Hopefully, we can do it during this generation rather than continuing
to be distracted by the endless, well-funded parade of software tools."

--might cause at least a few to be, the choice must be the first form.

I can guarantee you that the second would lead to some instances of
cervical displacement; I am pretty sure that the first never would.


--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, Owlcroft House
http://owlcroft.com/english/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Whence this form?
    ... "If we start from the premise that in this phrase ... puts it, "idiom over grammar". ... preposition, maybe it can be a preposition other times too. ... (And try that with "repeating" if you want something that really sounds ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Whence this form?
    ... that are parallel in grammar and sense. ... "rather than repeats" at Google Books have nothing after the first ... verb, such as 'It resembles rather than repeats an old theorem of the ... Of course, nobody writes, "Rather than repeats the required reading, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Cube Action?
    ... I do consider myself knowledgeable in English grammar, ... the OP's phrase "dropped after some consideration" is ... Also, your dictionary gives highly abbreviated definitions, and you ...
    (rec.games.backgammon)
  • Re: "Could of" (Was: Be and Have in Arabic, English and German)
    ... preposition could follow a modal; a preposition could govern a VP; ... Several native speakers seem to have strong intuitions that in this phrase *is* indeed a form of a lexeme "of". ... The suggestion of a local reanalysis of just this one set of strings modal++Participle implies that this set of strings must have been represented in speaker's minds as a storage unit independently from other "have"+Verb collocations, although its composite meaning would have been computable from its smaller parts in a regular way, and thus its separate representation would have been redundant within the grammar. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Cube Action?
    ... pass after X escapes. ... I do consider myself knowledgeable in English grammar, ... the OP's phrase "dropped after some consideration" is ...
    (rec.games.backgammon)
Loading