Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
Subject: Re: much as a determiner or an adverb?
Organization: None
Message-ID: <gcmoa1l5asmi9kca2chq14oalc0rp7lmqu@4ax.com>
References: <64hoa19deuedo1ak34qq7s96onaeiq07h3@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 21
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:53:19 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.133.202.94
X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net
X-Trace: newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net 1118591599 66.133.202.94 (Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:53:19 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:53:19 PDT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:770
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:25:08 GMT, Pine <pine@sbcglobal.net>
said:
> He was fundamentally too much a man of strong convictions to be
> correctly described as open-minded.
> He was too much a man, and too much an unusual type of man.
> But he was too much a man of appetites, too painterly, not to
> recognize the value,both sensual and moral, of a gesture.
> In the above three sentences, does 'much' function as a determiner or
> an adverb?
I vote for adverb, pure and simple.
(Note that in the above, "pure" and "simple" are adjectives,
not adverbs, so "purely and simply" would be wrong, wrong,
wrong.)
|
|