| 词组 | first two, two first |
| 释义 | first two, two first When first and a cardinal number are used together, there are two ways of ordering them: either "the three first Gospels" (an example from Alford 1866) or "the first three Gospels."«The OED shows that the first of these constructions is the older, dating back to at least the 14th century. The latter construction is attested from the late 16th century. The OED editor suggests that the latter construction is the result of the common people's perception of first as an ordinal. The OED explanation works very well for first, but Jespersen 1909-49 (volume 2) notes that the same competition in word order occurs with last and next as well as first. The development of the two competing constructions, then, is not likely to be explained by simple logic; let us just accept it as historical fact. The older construction—"the two first"—became the subject of commentary and controversy in the second half of the 18th century. Lounsbury 1908, who devotes nearly 10 pages to a discussion of the controversy, mentions several separate occasions in which the older use was criticized, including a dispute the poet Thomas Moore had with a critic and with his printer in 1833. The first of the usage writers in our collection to mention the issue is Alford 1866, who defends his use ofthe three first Gospels" against critics. Since that time, the subject has been reviewed in a large number of usage books, most of them coming between Alford and the 1930s, although it does appear in some books as recent as Freeman 1983 and Harper 1985. There is no shortage of literary evidence for the older construction: • I cast my eyes but by chance on Catiline; and in the three or four first pages, found enough to conclude that Johnson writ not correctly —John Dryden, "Defence of the Epilogue," 1672 • ... and procure a transcript of the ten or twenty first lines of each —Samuel Johnson, letter, 7 Aug. 1755 • Why, the two last volumes are worse than the four first —Thomas Gray, letter, 8 Mar. 1758 • ... the seven first years of his pacific reign —Daniel Defoe, The True Born Englishman, 1701 (in Lounsbury) • ... the three next pictures —The Spectator, No. 167 (in Jespersen) • The Examiner has been down this month, and was very silly the five or six last papers —Jonathan Swift, Journal to Stella, 24 Aug. 1711 • ... the preface to the five first imperfect editions — Alexander Pope, appendix to The Dunciad, 1743 edition (in Lounsbury) • ... the average price of the sixty-four first years of the present century —Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1788 (in Lounsbury) • ... during the two or three last years of his life, he was more fond of company than ever —Oliver Goldsmith, quoted in a footnote to Swift's Journal to Stella, 1824 edition • The two last days were very pleasant —Jane Austen, letter, 8 Sept. 1816 The basis for the objection to the older construction is logic, supposedly; the argument urged is that there can be one first and one last. Jespersen comments on this argument: • Pedants have objected to combinations like the three first lines on the absurd plea that there is only one first line (as if it were not possible to speak of the first years of one's life!) Alford attacks the logic of the usage from a somewhat different angle. He objects to "the first three Gospels"— the correction urged upon him by his critics—on the grounds that "the first three" to him implied the existence of a second three—and there are only four Gospels. Lounsbury also makes use of this argument. The appeal to logic against the older construction depends on the assumption that first has but one meaning—the first in a denumerable series—the falsity of which Jespersen demonstrated. The fact that this argument is fallacious has not prevented its often being repeated—as recently as Freeman 1983. The argument of Alford and Lounsbury is not especially strong either: the meaning they ascribe to the newer construction does sometimes occur, but in speech, at least, Alford's meaning for "the first three Gospels" is likely to be differentiated from his critics' meaning for the same expression by stress and intonation. More simple-minded commentators have merely called the older construction wrong, but, of course, it is not. What is true, however, is that the older construction is falling out of use. Longman 1984 describes it as old-fashioned. The survey of the usage panel in Harper 1975, 1985 shows 19 percent of the panelists using the older construction and 81 percent the newer construction. Our files have very few examples of the older construction, although it does turn up from time to time: • ... published the year before the two first volumes of Tristram Shandy —John Butt, English Literature in the Mid-Eighteenth Century, edited & completed by Geoffrey Carnall, 1979 But the newer construction is the one you will usually find: • Between his last two comedies he went on some diplomatic mission to Constantinople —Bonamy Dobrée, Restoration Comedy, 1924 • The first couple chapters are pretty good —E. B. White, letter, 26 Oct. 1959 • The first six volumes set a high standard —Times Literary Supp., 31 Oct. 1968 • This play ... drags rather badly for the first two acts —James Sutherland, English Literature of the Late Seventeenth Century, 1969 We think that the newer construction is right now the more common one idiomatically, and if you have been born since the 1920s, it is the one you will use automatically. But remember that anyone who happens to still use the older order is not wrong. |
| 随便看 |
英语用法大全包含2888条英语用法指南，基本涵盖了全部常用英文词汇及语法点的翻译及用法，是英语学习的有利工具。