Semantics, again
What is the difference between the two phrases “her adopted Chinese daughter” and “her daughter, who was adopted from China”?
The first, to me, labels my daughter. In English, if the modifier is considered overarchingly important, it is placed before the noun it modifies; if it is seen as incidental, it is placed in a modifying phrase after the noun:
“She threw the red ball” (the fact that it is red is the most important thing about the ball in this discussion; it’s usually used to separate it from the blue ball and the black ball in the same group)
versus
“She threw the ball, which is red” (the important thing is that she threw the ball; that it’s red is an ancillary description)
In other words, if you wrote:
“She was at the party with her adopted Chinese daughter”, the most important aspect of the daughter is that she is adopted and that she is Chinese.
“She was at the party with her daughter, who was adopted from China”, the most important fact here is that the girl is her daughter, not that she was adopted from China.
I know that to many, this seems like a really little thing, a hair-splitting, a minor distinction. But it is a very unconscious, very deep-seated aspect of the English language, and it bothers me (as a writer) because it is such an unstated and unconscious thing.
posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments
