Skip to main content

meaning - Explaining the comparative form of "numb"



The most common definition I have of numb is:




  1. "Deprived of the power of sensation."




  2. "Deprived of feeling or responsiveness."




These definitions show up in nearly the same form in multiple dictionaries, yet I see comparative and superlative forms "number" and "numbest" listed as well. I understand numb to mean complete deprivation of feeling, and so here's my question.


I had a student write the sentence: His fingers got number the longer he stayed outside. She asked if it was correct (because the spelling looked funny to her; it looked like number, as in "the number seven"), and I told her that numb didn't need a comparative form because it implied complete lack of sensation. I told her she could phrase a sentence His fingers slowly became numb... to signify that he was getting colder, but that she should not use numb in a comparative or superlative sense. Can somebody explain to me the reasoning for the comparative and superlative forms of this word. As well, I have the same problem with "wet, wetter, wettest."



Answer



There are two issues involved here.



  1. The pronunciation of final nasal-stop clusters like /-mb/ and /-ŋɡ/ with suffixes.

  2. The use of the comparative and superlative degrees, and their meanings.


(1) is the reason why the spelled word number (meaning more numb) "looked funny". In print, there is already a word spelled that way, though it's pronounced differently, so most people wouldn't notice it in real language, only in writing:



  • This is number /'nəmbər/ twenty-seven.

  • My left ring finger is number /'nəmər/ than my left index finger.


In other words, the one number /'nəmbər/ doesn't rhyme with the other number /'nəmər/. The same is true for singer, which doesn't rhyme with finger. And for the same reason; English words ending in /mb/ or /ŋɡ/ dropped the final stop and kept the nasal. Except /nd/, though that's elided to /n/ now most of the time; however, that isn't reflected in the spelling. Except on the internet.


There's even another minimal pair, both spelled longer:



  • The adjective long /lɔŋ/ plus the comparative -er produces /'lɔŋɡər/ 'more long', with /ɡ/

  • The verb long plus the agentive -er produces /'lɔŋər/ 'one who longs', without /ɡ/


That's issue (1).


Issue (2) has been adequately dealt with in the comments; the initial confusion seems to be due to the common mistake of expecting literal dictionary definitions of grammatical terms to say anything useful about how grammar actually works. Dictionaries list some meanings of some words in some contexts; but they don't tell you about grammar. For that, one consults a Grammar, not a Dictionary.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more