3. The degrees of comparison

Linguistic status of the category of degree of comparison

The problem of degrees of comparison has given rise to much controversy. First of all, there is no unity of opinions concerning the character of this category in Modern English. Some linguists think that degree of comparison should be treated as a lexical category. In their opinion, 'long - longer - the longest' represent three different words, not forms of one and the same word.

Criticizing this point of view, Smirnitsky says that the degree of comparison is a grammatical category. In the first place, the forms 'long - longer - the longest' are characterized by identical lexical meaning. In the second place, all the three forms have the same stem 'long'.

Adjectives that lack degrees of comparison

As a rule, only qualitative adjectives admit of degrees of comparison, because they denote properties capable of appearing in different degrees,

E.g. fine - finer - the finest

But some qualitative adjectives stand outside the category of comparison. They are:

1) Adjectives that express the highest of a quality,

E.g. supreme, extreme

2) Adjectives having the suffix -ish,

E.g. reddish, whitish

3) Adjectives with a negative meaning,

E.g. illiterate

4) Adjectives expressing incomparable qualities,

E.g. deaf, dead, lame

Relative adjectives have no degrees of comparison.

Number of degrees of comparison

The next question is how many degrees of comparison the English adjectives have. The majority of linguists single out three degrees of comparison: positive, comparative and superlative.

The positive degree is looked upon as the basis for comparison. It expresses a simple quality without comparison,

E.g. They are all strong men.

The comparative degree indicates that the quality is found in the person or thing described in a higher degree than in some other person or thing,

E.g. The man in the middle is stronger than the man on the left.

The superlative degree denotes the highest degree of a quality,

E.g. He is the strongest of the three men.

As a matter of fact, the positive degree does not imply comparison. That is why H. Sweet, M. Ganshina and N. Vasilevskaya mention only two degrees of comparison, namely the comparative and the superlative degrees. However, there is little justification for excluding the positive degree from the classification, because although it does not imply any comparison, it makes comparison possible.

O. Jespersen suggests a classification based on semantic criteria. He distinguishes:

1) Superiority (more dangerous than);

2) Equality (as dangerous as);

3) Inferiority (less dangerous than).

The classification of degrees of comparison, put forward A.I. Smirnitsky, on the whole does not differ from the traditional one. He also speaks about the positive, the comparative and the superlative degrees. But he finds it possible to combine the comparative degree and the superlative degree into one group which he calls 'relative'. Following O. Jespersen, he makes use of the semantic criterion. The meaning of the positive degree, in his opinion, is absolute. It is the norm of some quality, so to speak. As to the comparative and the superlative degrees, they are both relative in meaning. Thus, if one says 'Mrs. Black is three years younger than her husband', one does not mean that Mrs. Black is young. She may be 75 years old whereas her husband is 78. The sentences only indicates that Mrs. Black has more of this quality (being young) than her husband. So, the meaning of the comparative degree is relative.

If one says 'Mary is the youngest in the family...', one does not mean that Mary is a little girl. One simply emphasizes that Mary has the highest degree of this quality (being young) as compared with the rest of the family. Thus, the meaning of the superlative degree is also relative.

Taking into consideration the relative character of meaning of the comparative and the superlative degrees, as opposed to the positive degree, A.I. Smirnitsky thinks there is good ground to speak of 2 forms of comparison only the positive degree and the relative degree which exists in two varieties - the comparative degree and the superlative degree.

P ositive Relative

Comparative Superlative

Synthetic and analytical forms of degrees of comparison

The problem of forms of degrees of comparison is also controversial. Monosyllabic adjectives, i.e. adjectives consisting of one syllable, and some disyllabic adjectives, which have two syllables, form the comparative degree with the help of the suffix -er and the superlative degree with the help of the suffix -est,

E.g. The days get longer...

...there were the longest days of the year.

This is a synthetic way of forming degrees of comparison. The existence of synthetic forms of degrees of comparison is recognized by the majority of linguists. As to the combinations with 'more' and 'most', 'less' and 'least', the question is debatable.

First, we shall discuss the problem of the combinations with 'less' and 'least': 'important - less important - least important'. To qualify these constructions as analytical degree of comparison, we must prove that they represent analytical forms of the adjective 'important'. Analytical forms are generally singled out when opposed to synthetic forms. As to the combinations with 'less' and 'least', they have no parallel synthetic forms to express a lower degree of this or that quality.

Thus, according to O. Curme and G.N. Vorontsova, the existence of correlation with corresponding synthetic forms was absolutely necessary only in the Middle English period, when the first analytical forms came to be used. Now, when there are a lot of analytical forms in the system of the English language, they may appear independently, on the analogy of other analytical forms. Thus, the combinations with 'less' and 'least', in their opinion, were coined on the analogy of the analytical forms built on the pattern 'more/most + adjective'. This, however, is a debatable point, since the other analytical forms in the English language have parallel synthetic forms.

What is more, the words 'less' and 'least' do not either lose or weaken their lexical meaning as auxiliary elements in analytical forms should,

E.g. I found the memory much less vivid...

So, the adjectival combinations with 'less' and 'least' are free word combinations, not analytical forms of degrees of comparison.

Now we shall take up the problem of the combinations with 'more' and 'most': 'beautiful - more beautiful - most beautiful',

E.g. This is the most wonderful and most exciting picture ever made; more laughable than 'Charley's Aunt', more moving than 'Limelight'; more expensive than 'Chin Chin Chow', more beautiful than 'Romeo and Juliet'.

According to V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Ivanova and L.L. Iofik, they are also outside the grammatical category of degrees of comparison. First, 'more' and 'most' form combinations with adjectives similar to those with 'less' and 'least'.

E.g. more beautiful - less beautiful, most beautiful - least beautiful

Oh, I'm the most sensible person here - and Lucille is the least sensible.

Since the forms 'less beautiful' and 'least beautiful' are not degrees of comparison, the combinations with 'more' and 'most' cannot be considered degrees of comparison either.

Second, combinations with 'most' may be used with the indefinite article to express a very high degree of quality,

E.g. 'A most tragic thing happened to her early in the war', which is equivalent to 'A very sad thing happened to her early in the war'.

This meaning is not to be found in the synthetic superlative degree. Constructions of the type 'a prettiest girl' do not occur in the English language. Therefore it is doubtful whether the combinations 'more + adjective' and 'most + adjective' are forms of degrees of comparison.

This argument of theirs is not convincing, since in the sentence 'A most tragic thing happened to her early in the war' 'most' is not the superlative degree of 'much', but an independent word, an adverb synonymous with 'very'.

Finally, V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Ivanova and L.L. Iofik consider it wrong to refer the forms with 'more' and 'most' to degrees of comparison because 'more' and 'most' fully retain their lexical meaning. They really do,

E.g. You'll be more comfortable if you turn the sent down.

They were the most beautiful children she had ever seen.

However, this conception is not universally accepted. The majority of linguists think that such combinations as 'more beautiful', 'most beautiful' are analytical degrees of comparison, or at least analytical degrees of comparison in the making. They adduce the following proofs.

First, polysyllabic qualitative adjectives like 'beautiful' express properties which can be present in different degrees and therefore they can have degrees of comparison.

Second, the analytical forms of degrees of comparison with 'more' and 'most' have corresponding synthetic forms in -er and -est,

E.g. more beautiful - prettier, most beautiful - prettiest

Third, analytical forms in Modern English are constantly on the increase. All the above mentioned arguments sound rather convincing.