meaning - "Skyscrapers are of various shapes" vs. "skyscrapers are various shapes"

Skyscrapers are of various shapes.

Skyscrapers are various shapes.

Why do we use of in the sentence above?

Is there any difference in meaning between the two sentences?

Answer

Ellipsis occurs in many constructions in English.

Words considered non-vital are often omitted.

Here, the post-modifying adjectival prepositional phrase 'of various shapes' is seen to be ellipted by the omission of the preposition:

2) Skyscrapers are of various shapes.

1) Skyscrapers are various shapes.

The use of a preposition is optional in the following sentences.

Prepositions are often omitted from temporal adverbials / whatever temporal 'additives' go with be:

We were here (in) the winter before last.

She visited us (on) the day before yesterday.

She was here (in) the previous December.

They waited (for) two hours for the bus to come.

I'd say it doesn't make sense for 'two hours' in the elided last example to be analysed as a direct object. There is a name for such DO-lookalikes, noun groups functioning adverbially and/or locatively / directionally / temporally: adverbial objectives.

The Rohirrim went north. Is John home yet? Today I came a different way. Elms stood either side of the street. Let's go some place. He lives next door.

Similarly, though the corresponding adjectival usage is, I feel, very rare, I'd class 'various shapes' in OP's elided example as an adjectival rather than a DO:

Skyscrapers are typically rectangular, stepped, or subtly rounded. Yes,

Skyscrapers are rectangular, stepped, or subtly rounded.

Skyscrapers are various shapes.

Though the 'adjectival objective' (don't quote me! - at least for a while) is very uncommon, the few examples that do exist seem to be increasing in popularity, as this Google Ngram seems to indicate. On the first page of Google hits for "are different shapes", 5 are obviously this usage as opposed to 2 which are obviously other constructions (following existential 'there' . . .).

In some cases, the 'of', complete, version, would sound ridiculous:

The Shard and the Gherkin are not the same shape / size.

but obviously 'the same shape' / 'the same size' can't be taken as DOs.

I suppose that there is the slight possibility of confusion:

The pyramids and kites on pages 2 and 3 are different shapes.

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 ...

nouns - what do you call the person who passes the trophies to the prize giver/presenter?

The person who gives out the trophies to the winners are called award presenters. So what do u call the person who passes the trophies to the presenter? Thanks!

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.

Notes

Search This Blog