SUBMODIFICATION OF ADJECTIVES

SUBMODIFICATION OF ADJECTIVES We have earlier discussed how qualitative epithets may be identified by virtue of their being "gradable" - the qualities which they identify may be expressed in varying degree. Thus something may be "very old", "quite old", "rather old", "incredibly old" and so on. This is called SUBMODIFICATION, and the words such as "very", "quite", "really" etc which are used to do this are SUBMODIFIERS. Here are a few examples with gradable epithets:-
e.g.	a fairly old terraced house
	a quite interesting film
	an awfully boring speech
	this very difficult problem
	a fantastically large amount

Some words which occur as submodifiers have no other function in the language, as for example "very", but many others such as "awfully" and "fantastically" also function independently as adverbs. Contrast the following:-

e.g.	(a) She sang terribly.
	(b) She gave a terribly long speech.
	(c) She gave a terribly good party.

When used as submodifiers the inherent meaning of such words may be used to enhance the epithet which it modifies, as in (b), or it may sometimes be "overuled" by the epithet and serve purely as an intensifier, as in (c), perhaps for rhetorical rather than semantic purposes. The submodifying function illustrated by words like "somewhat", "very" etc in the above examples is called INTENSIFYING or TEMPERING submodification. Adjectives are graded in reference to a norm, and hence the reference is to some shared knowledge which is outside the context of the immediate speech event. Thus if we speak of a "large house" we mean large with reference to what is understood as being a typical size of house, a notion which we share by virtue of our common experience of the class of things which are called "houses". There are two other forms of submodification for gradable words, the COMPARATIVE and SUPERLATIVE forms: "more" and "most", and "less/least", which express degree not in respect of some shared generalised notion of a norm, but in terms of reference to some other specific criterion which is supplied elsewhere in the text or situation.
e.g.	This is a more valuable painting than the other one.
	This is the most valuable painting in the gallery.

For this reason, there is an important relationship between the comparative and superlative submodifiers and the deictic, since these forms function by pointing to a qualitative contrast which exists between the particular thing represented by the headword and some other specific member or members of the same class of things. Consider the difference between the following examples:-
e.g.	(i) the most beautiful girl in the world
	(ii) a most interesting book

In examples like (i), the use of the definite article indicates that the superlative quality exists by virtue of comparison with all other members of the class of things which the headword signifies, within the frame of some specific field of reference. The superlative indicates the extreme degree within the range of this field of reference. In the above example, the girl is "the most beautiful" in comparison with all other girls within this particular field of reference, the range of which is here given in the phrase "in the world" (as contrasted with, say, "in Birmingham"). In example (ii), on the other hand, the use of the indefinite article places a generality upon the statement such that no specific field of reference is indicated. In this case then, "most" functions not as a true superlative, but rather as an emphatic tempering submodifier, something like "extremely", since it does not express an extreme degree within parameters defined by a field of reference, but instead relates to some generalised "norm" of what constitutes an interesting book. A contrast in the use of articles also exists in the case of the comparative submodifier "more".
e.g.	(i) This is a more interesting book.
	(ii) This is the more interesting book.

In example (i) the indefinite article indicates a comparative reference to any other book or books to which the speaker had previously referred. (Note, however, that even with the indefinite article the comparison is still to some specific textual or situational reference pertaining to the individual speech event, not to some generalised norm). The use of the definite article in (ii), however, establishes a specific comparison between two items - it sets up a dual contrast. This is a special function of the definite article when used in comparative forms. We can then relate the three kinds of submodification as follows:-
(i)	intensifiers modify the epithet on a gradable scale which relates to some generalised notion of a "norm", which exists implicitly in the wider cultural context;
(ii)	comparatives relate the epithet to some particular explicit referent or referents, and are graded only in relation to this specific criterion;
(iii)	superlatives also relate to some explicit point of reference, but indicate an extreme degree in the scale of gradation and have a specific field of reference, whose range is indicated in the text (e.g. "in the world", "in the building" etc).

* The above description has treated the comparative and superlative forms in terms of premodification. There is of course another system of inflections which applies to adjectives of one or two syllables, where the premodifiers "more", "most", "less" and "least" are not usually employed.
e.g.	the oldest boy in the class
	she is prettier than her sister

In all other respects, however, the foregoing points apply equally to the inflected adjectives in their comparative and superlative forms as for those which are premodified.

** SUGGESTED READING. Sinclair, J McH., "A Course in Spoken English: Grammar", Chapter 3, section 20, pages 157 - 168.