-1

It is ungrammatical to say "He is a little more sophisticated man" OR "He is a little more smart and sophisticated man". My reasoning as to why is as follows:

The problem is that 'a little' is a construction in itself. 'Move over a little'. 'Move over a little more'. Whatever you analyse 'little' as here, it isn't a noun. Realistically, it is probably a contraction or ellipsis of 'a little bit'. Either way, if you say 'a little more', the 'a' is part of the construction, it is not the indefinite article to a noun. In 'a little more sophisticated movie', the 'a' belongs to 'a little', not 'movie'. So we are short of an indefinite article. If we say 'an a little more sophisticated movie', that too is wrong. The solution? Don't use 'a little', use 'somewhat' or 'slightly' or some other construction that doesn't already use 'a'. 'somewhat more sophisticated', 'slightly more sophisticated', 'a little more sophisticated'. Only 'a little' requires 'a'. Oh, and if you say 'it is little more sophisticated (than)', that means 'it is NOT MORE sophisticated (than)' which is an entirely different meaning. 'It is little more sophisticated than the technology of last century."

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/little-a-little-few-a-few

In the same way, if you say "He is an 'a' grade student", 'a' is not an article, so you need 'an' as the indefinite article.

Does anyone have a different viewpoint as to why "He is a little more sophisticated man" as a stand alone sentence (not followed by 'than' or any implied content) is ungrammatical?

Dunsanist
  • 679
  • 1
  • 8
  • 20
  • 2
    A little more sophisticated man = A little man who is more sophisticated. – curious-proofreader Jul 07 '16 at 10:56
  • Unlike 'slightly', 'a little' is not used before comparative adjectives used prenominally in order to modify them. As you say. 'This house is slightly bigger.' 'This is a slightly bigger house.' 'This house is a little bigger.' But *'This is a little bigger house.' This probably is because of the reading curious-proofreader indicates. The 'a' of the phrase and that of the noun involved would conflict. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 07 '16 at 11:25
  • Further to my question-- 'a little' is only used with uncountable nouns. "I drank water", "I drank a little water", "I drank a little more water". This is precisely because uncountable nouns don't need an article, so there is no conflict with 'a little'. But "I drove a little more car"…nonsense. "I drove a little more expensive car"…also wrong. Putting more words in there helps disguise that it is ungrammatical, but that is all. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:28
  • Oh, and the original sentence that is under contention was "I would answer, if you ask me, that ELU is closer to a little more smart and sophisticated question forum and ELL is a little less sophisticated question forum." – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:30
  • Oh, and quoting from dialogue in a play (which is what it appeared to be) proves nothing. 'Character 1: I didn't see nothin', ya lousy doity stinkin' copper!' Dialogue is meant to be realistic, not grammatical. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:34
  • Curious-proofreader…right, because the 'a' has to be read as the indefinite article to 'man', and cannot be part of 'a little'. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:37
  • @Dunsanist Uh, if dialog reflects how people actually speak, it is grammatical by definition. That word doesn't mean what you think it means. And if you specifically mean the dialog I "quoted", I didn't, I invented it (Bert and Ernie are characters from Sesame Street; they do not snap at waiters). That I could demonstrates it is grammatical. Whether it is idiomatic, or appropriate to some register or other (which is what you're actually asking about, without knowing it) is a separate question. One which Edwin charitably edited your question to actually ask. – Dan Bron Jul 07 '16 at 11:38
  • You made up a reference and that proves something? Okay, here's my reference: "Too impatient you are, and also framligham shot the man man the." All grammatical, because I could. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:47
  • It's ungrammatical, pure and simple. If you want to go for a simpler explanation, go for 'a little is used with uncountable nouns'. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:49
  • @Dunsanist No, it's not grammatical "because you could", it's only grammatical if someone could read it without raising an eyebrow. That was the case with my example, because the usage is grammatical, and impossible in your case because it's not. Your notions of grammaticality need to be a little more sophisticated. – Dan Bron Jul 07 '16 at 11:52
  • From: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/little-a-little-few-a-fewA little, a few with a noun We use a little with singular uncountable nouns. We use a few with plural countable nouns: Mary said nothing, but she drank some tea and ate a little bread. We stayed a few days in Florence and visited the museums. – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 11:54
  • grammatical ɡrəˈmatɪk(ə)l/ adjective
    1. relating to grammar.

    "the grammatical function of a verb" 2. well formed; in accordance with the rules of the grammar of a language. "a grammatical sentence"

     – Dunsanist Jul 07 '16 at 12:00
  • I don't think He is a little* more sophisticated man* could ever stand up as a valid sentence in any context, but He is a rather* more sophisticated man* is perfectly okay in any context where some other (less sophisticated) person has already been mentioned. – FumbleFingers Jul 07 '16 at 13:19
  • I think I know where this question stemmed from, (actually you've stated where in the comments) and it might have made for an interesting question had it sounded more open-minded. It seems you have already passed judgement on this issue, which begs the question why did you post it, if you already knew the answer? This smacks of pettiness. Finally, native speakers are not immune from making mistakes when they are posting comments. Your brain is thinking ahead but your typing fingers lag behind. – Mari-Lou A Jul 08 '16 at 11:14
  • The point is that the user in question (Rathony) continually marks questions as off-topic and otherwise throws his/her weight around, while having a shaky grasp of the finer points of usage. In other words, he or she is intent on enforcing his/her own (shaky) conception of the language. See here http://meta.english.stackexchange.com/questions/8129/to-users-with-more-than-20-000-reputation-points where he/she urges people to be more active in deleting answers. – Dunsanist Jul 09 '16 at 13:28
  • @Dunsanist Do you know how many off-topic questions and answers are posted on ELU every day? Your two answers to your own question Phrasal verbs in the passive voice are also off-topic which convinced me that you are not even close to a native English speaker. Why would my question urging people to be more active in deleting answers get upvotes while your crappy answers receive downvotes? Think about it. –  Jul 09 '16 at 17:02
  • Are you afraid you'll run out of room on this site? This is the internet. There is no need to go deleting anything. This site is searchable. All you are doing is reducing the functionality of the site. Don't you have anything better to do with your time? If someone asks a question you don't like, just ignore it. Every single person who accesses this site, even if only once, has the same rights as you. Where does your compulsion come from to pretend to be some kind of Internal Security? – Dunsanist Jul 11 '16 at 12:39

2 Answers2

1

Your assumption (or argument) lacks one important principle in understanding how the English language works. English like any other languages in the world doesn't work like mathematics.

You are claiming that "a little more sophisticated man" can't be used because the "a" belongs to a set phrase a little and the "a" can't modify the noun man. You concluded that "an a little more sophisticated man" is wrong.

Now, contrast the following sentences using the same logic.

  1. This is a problem.

  2. This is a bigger problem.

  3. This is a little bigger problem. (The Google search shows 16,200 hits)

  4. This is a slightly bigger problem. (The Google search shows 10,600 hits)

The noun problem is a countable noun. Therefore, No. 3 should never be used because, I quote the reason you provided, "The problem is that 'a little' is a construction in itself."

How can we possibly explain why No. 3 works? We can only explain that it works because the adverb little is synonymous with slightly. Otherwise, No. 4 or "This is an a little bigger problem" should be used. But I have never seen "I have an a little bigger problem" in my whole life. English never allows two articles to be used consecutively.

Does No. 3 read like @curious-proofreader commented?

A little bigger problem = A little problem which is bigger.

No, it doesn't.

I agree that in some context, using "slightly" could sound more idiomatic, but in other context, especially when "a little" is placed before comparatives such as "more complex", "more complicated" and "more sophisticated", etc. using "a little" doesn't sound unidiomatic at all.

This is not a grammatical issue. If it is, No. 3 above should never be used.

Community
  • 1
  • In my own personal experience, no. 3 is never used. I've never heard anyone use a little like that, and I would certainly raise a multitude of eyebrows if I did. No. 3 does read like what curious-proofreader commented to me. You should also note that even of the top results in your Google search, most are either using the phrase in the sense suggested by curious-proofreader or just plain nonsense (the first one reads, “Terrence the Terrible's growl was a little bigger problem because it was he could eat”). – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jul 07 '16 at 17:11
  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the comment. In my own personal experience, I have heard "We just have a little bigger problem to deal with.... Do you mean it sounds like it is a little problem which is bigger? –  Jul 07 '16 at 17:19
  • Yup, that's exactly what it sounds like to me. In the article you linked to there, it sounds like sarcasm (of sorts) to me, meaning basically, “We just have this tiny little rather enormous problem to deal with”. Though it's clearly taken out of context and doesn't really make sense where it's put, however you read it. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jul 07 '16 at 17:27
  • @JanusBahsJacquet If it is used sarcastically, I don't see any reason why "We have a slightly bigger problem to deal with" can't be used in the same way. "Bigger problem" means the problem is more serious and if you put "a little" or "slightly", it means the seriousness is not that noticeable. What is your thought? Do you mean "We have a little big problem" and "We have a slightly big problem" don't mean the same? –  Jul 07 '16 at 17:33
  • The two mean slightly different things. If it weren't sarcasm and did mean ‘slightly bigger’, its reference is completely lacking—slightly bigger than what? Some comparatives can work as semi-absolutives (cf. the bigger picture, which isn't necessarily bigger than any other picture, vs. the slightly bigger picture, which is). Using it that way is a stretch here, but since there's nothing to act as the reference (bigger than what?), it's the option that makes the most sense to me. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jul 07 '16 at 17:37
  • @JanusBahsJacquet Does a comparative sentence always require a thing to be compared? If you contrast "I have a little bigger fish to fry" with "I have a slightly bigger fish to fry", do you see any difference? –  Jul 07 '16 at 17:52
  • Yes, a clear difference. The second one means that you have a fish to fry that is slightly bigger than the fish you've just been talking about (or whatever other fish the context would indicate), while the first one is fairly nonsensical and barely passes the ‘makes sense’ mark without a good deal of poetic-sarcastic licence—like the one in the article. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jul 07 '16 at 19:15
  • @JanusBahsJacquet I'll say the construction is atypical, but it doesn't strike me as wrong. See for example my deleted answer. I deleted it because Edwin changed the question from "is this grammatical" to "is this appropriate or idiomatic", which my answer didn't address. – Dan Bron Jul 07 '16 at 20:54
  • @DanBron I suppose there must be a dialectal side to this. To me (and Edwin, it seems) it is definitely both unidiomatic and ungrammatical—or deliberately quirky wording at the very least. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jul 07 '16 at 21:03
  • @JanusBahsJacquet I'll buy deliberately quirky for a dollar. – Dan Bron Jul 07 '16 at 21:25
  • I love a good discussion, and I have to admit I admire your steeliness to answer the OP's sneering Q. But....talking from bitter experience, relying on Google to support claims of grammaticality is very risky. A much better and more reliable source is GoogleBooks. Back to Google, there are in fact only 112 results for "a little bigger problem" Google makes these wild OTT predictions which you have to verify by clicking the tenth page, then suddenly the prognostics shrink. Why? IDK – Mari-Lou A Jul 08 '16 at 11:03
  • @Mari-LouA Actually I deleted my answer after Janus' comments as his comments make perfect sense. I sought another opinion and Dan said it is not wrong. I will delete this answer when a self-proclaimed-non-standard-English-speaking-native-English speaker comments on my answer. –  Jul 08 '16 at 11:15
  • @Rathony Why would you delete your answer if someone who admits to speaking nonstandard English comments on it? I mean that's a rare breed to begin with, and even if one comes along I don't see the logic. Are you thinking of someone in particular? – Dan Bron Jul 08 '16 at 11:33
  • @DanBron I think it's code for "uneducated" native speaker. I hope it's not me!! No, he hasn't deleted his answer—phew! – Mari-Lou A Jul 08 '16 at 11:35
0

Out of curiosity, would the following be perfectly acceptable to the OP?

“He is a little more sophisticated, man”

I believe this is a legitimate use of the comma, and it makes the sentence sound a little bit more grammatical.

Mari-Lou A
  • 91,183
  • If you want to do that, use a comma instead of a colon. But that does dodge the question a bit. You can see in my deleted answer one scenario where the complete and unaltered sentence, standing alone, is perfectly grammatical. – Dan Bron Jul 08 '16 at 11:26
  • @DanBron yes, it does dodge the question ever so slightly. But it works as a stand alone sentence... Re your deleted post, the OP doesn't want any added content. – Mari-Lou A Jul 08 '16 at 11:29
  • Your reservations are misplaced. Yes, your sentence is 100% grammatical, and even normal and standard. Be confident! Be proud! – Dan Bron Jul 08 '16 at 11:31
  • Your sentence is grammatical. 'Man' here is an interjection ('groovy, man!') and not a noun that connects to the rest of the sentence. Otherwise, you couldn't use a comma just before the noun. But then, it isn't a noun here... – Dunsanist Jul 09 '16 at 13:34