2

I am wondering whether this sentence is correct or not.

"The tree color is absolutely beautiful"

and if it's OK then what is the difference between the above sentence and the following sentence.

"The color of the tree is absolutely beautiful"

Thanks.

Laurel
  • 66,382
AKZ
  • 129
  • 4
    Tree color is a Noun Compound. It consists of two nouns forming a single unit. This one means the same thing as the noun phrase color of the tree(s), which is not a noun compound, but a head noun with a prepositional phrase. Since plural is not marked in noun compounds (it's not *Shoes Store), that compound could either mean color of the tree or color of the trees. In general, whenever we shorten a constituent, some information is lost, to be supplied, one hopes, by context. – John Lawler Oct 23 '18 at 16:30
  • 1
    It is possible (and not technically incorrect) to string multiple nouns together, as with "The autumn maple tree leaf color combination possibilities are amazing." But at a certain point, such strings of consecutive nouns will mark you as being, in all likelihood, either a government (especially military) bureaucrat or a marketing copywriter. – Sven Yargs Oct 24 '18 at 02:24

3 Answers3

2

In a comment, John Lawler wrote:

Tree color is a Noun Compound. It consists of two nouns forming a single unit. This one means the same thing as the noun phrase color of the tree(s), which is not a noun compound, but a head noun with a prepositional phrase. Since plural is not marked in noun compounds (it's not *Shoes Store), that compound could either mean color of the tree or color of the trees. In general, whenever we shorten a constituent, some information is lost, to be supplied, one hopes, by context.

tchrist
  • 134,759
-1

It depends on if you are referring to a colour that goes by the name tree or not.

You could be in a paint store and looking at various swatches. You stop at one and say:

Oh! I like that tree colour!

In this particular case, tree would not describe a plant but a colour. (In the same way, you could say, "Oh, I like that red colour.")

If using tree in this specific sense, then your two sentences would not mean the same thing.

In a more normal context, however, all of these would be taken to mean the same thing:

The tree colour is absolutely beautiful.
The colour of the tree is absolutely beautiful.
The tree's colour is absolutely beautiful.

Having said, I would say that tree colour would be the least common way of phrasing it, and colour of the tree the most common.

Jason Bassford
  • 38,040
-2

It's worth noting that "tree" (in this example) is something called an "attributive noun," a "noun adjunct," a "converted adjective," and a "noun premodifier." What this is, in simplest terms, is a noun that, in certain circumstances, can take on the role of an adjective. Not every noun can be used in that way. Proper nouns, for example, need to be made into Possessive Nouns in order to be used like this; however, many common nouns can be. I am not familiar of the specific grammatical rule for this, though.

There is no difference in your example of "tree color" vs "color of the tree" either. They both mean the same thing where "tree" and the prepositional phrase "of the tree" are descriptors of "color."

TL;DR - So, in this case, "tree" isn't actually acting as a noun at all; it is in fact acting like an adjective. It's not that it is an adjective (because it's not), it just is taking on a role similar to one.

Sora Tamashii
  • 218
  • 1
    Nope, it’s not an adjective. If it were an adjective, you could use adverbs on it like the seldom* tree color* or the quickly* tree color* — but you cannot. If it were an adjective, you could use it predicatively like the color is* tree* or even the color is very* tree* —but you cannot. If tree were an adjective, you could inflect it by degree like having a treer* color* or even the treest* color of all* —but you cannot. If it were an adjective, you couldn’t use other adjectives on it like a burnt* tree color* — but you can. Therefore it’s a noun here: Q.E.D. :) – tchrist Oct 23 '18 at 22:41
  • Then allow me to edit that to make it more clear. One second. EDIT: Already edited. lol – Sora Tamashii Oct 23 '18 at 22:47
  • Please, be my guest. And welcome to our site. – tchrist Oct 23 '18 at 22:49
  • 1
    Regarding proper nouns, perhaps consider whether there’s any difference to be teased out of the difference between attending Lincoln’s memorial service and visiting the Lincoln Memorial. And while it is possible to see France’s position as the position of France, for some speakers it cannot ever be the France position, only ever the French position. – tchrist Oct 23 '18 at 22:52
  • Wouldn't that be different altogether seeing as "Lincoln Memorial" is a single proper noun? In the case of the "French position" that'd be a different thing due to "French" being derived from a denotation describing a nationality of France for what is being described. See: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/381/when-should-the-word-english-be-capitalized/2060 – Sora Tamashii Oct 23 '18 at 22:55
  • That’s what always happens when you smash two nouns together: you create a single (albeit compound) noun, like doghouse and babysitter. Words that are proper nouns to begin with can seem a little resistant to this treatment at times, but the Andromeda galaxy works. You’re right that it has to be John’s mother for the mother of John, though, and never *John mother. – tchrist Oct 23 '18 at 23:02
  • 1
    For the people who downvoted this answer, please tell me what is incorrect with what I said so that I may correct it. – Sora Tamashii Nov 16 '18 at 20:00