0

I came upon this phrase in a Hilary Mantel's novel (Wolf Hall): "John Williamson is needed in the Cromwell business"

Why is the possessive form not being used for "Cromwell business".

Bookeater
  • 7,213
  • 2
  • 21
  • 35
Diego
  • 11
  • Why is the possessive form not being used? – Lambie Oct 30 '16 at 17:51
  • Why would you expect a possessive form there? Cromwell is clearly a name, and names don’t normally take definite articles—that alone indicates that it can’t be a possessive construction. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Oct 30 '16 at 17:59

2 Answers2

0

"Cromwell" is probably being used as an attributive noun, not as a possessive.

In English grammar, an attributive noun is a noun that modifies another noun and functions as an adjective. Also known as a noun premodifier, a noun adjunct, and a converted adjective.

grammar.about.com

The noun can be a proper noun (i.e. a name), or a common noun (e.g. 'science' or 'computer').

Here are some other examples:

  • This Shakespeare stuff is tough!

  • I hate this science junk.

  • I'm a computer technician.

  • I'm in the computer business.

Community
  • 1
DyingIsFun
  • 17,909
  • 1
    If the first nouns of such noun compounds really functioned as adjectives, they should display some adjectival behavior, like for instance being modifiable by an adverb. Some of them have the meaning of adjectives, such as those of your examples, but some don't. – Greg Lee Oct 30 '16 at 18:01
  • I assume the grammar.about.com article is using "functions as an adjective" in a loose and intuitive sense, not exactly the way a syntactician would use it. – DyingIsFun Oct 30 '16 at 18:03
  • 1
    The difference between attributive noun and prenominal adjective can become blurred. I think the juries are still out on 'steel bridge'. But even this has been mentioned here before. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 30 '16 at 18:04
  • @GregLee Good observation. Or like having graded forms. Perhaps it's best to separate form from function. Attributive nouns are nouns, not adjectives, but they function in sentences as modifiers of nouns, a function they share with adjectives. – deadrat Oct 30 '16 at 19:02
  • A noun cannot "function" as an adjective; that's a ridiculous notion. Attributive nominals are modifiers, not adjectives. – BillJ Oct 30 '16 at 19:04
  • For what it's worth, many style books speak of nouns, prepositional phrases, participial phrases, and subordinate clauses "functioning as adjectives". It's a standard way to speak when these types of constructions modify a noun. As I mentioned above, it's a "loose" and "intuitive" way of speaking. It's not meant to be a robust syntactic claim. – DyingIsFun Oct 30 '16 at 20:23
  • 1
    @Silenus Haven't you heard? CGEL has a monopoly on metalanguage. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 30 '16 at 22:22
  • @EdwinAshworth, I have not, but I'll have to check it out! – DyingIsFun Oct 30 '16 at 22:55
  • @Silenus Not that I'm against attempts at rationalisation of analyses. But opinions must not merely be imposed. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 08:34
0

"Cromwell business" is not a possessive construction. It's a compound noun, made up of the two nouns "Cromwell" and "business". Compare it with the "Dreyfus affair" or our "Russia problem". One diagnostic of such compounds is the missing apostrophe s, which you note, but also, stress is typically on the first element. Compare "Cromwell business" with "Cromwell's business".

Greg Lee
  • 17,406
  • No. 'Cromwell business' isn't even a collocation if one rules out 'Cromwell Business Directory', 'Cromwell Business Systems', 'Cromwell Business Park' etc. There are far too few hits to support such extensive usage. 'Goldfish bowl' may well qualify as a compound, but 'bismuth vase' is just a [very] free combination (in this case including an attributive noun). – Edwin Ashworth Oct 30 '16 at 21:26
  • @EdwinAshworth Before there was Google to tell you what things could be collocated, you must have had serious difficulty communicating. – Greg Lee Oct 30 '16 at 21:35
  • It would be more helpful to other readers (and yourself) if you (1) checked up on what compounds, collocations, and free combinations are and then (2) corrected your answer. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 30 '16 at 22:16
  • 1
    @EdwinAshworth, I confess that I didn't check. I don't accept your view of language as some sort of melange of memorized collocations. In this regard, I am a Chomskian, who regards language as a system with more structure than a set of memorized linkages of the sort Skinner proposed. I think you're wrong. But it is an interesting and fundamental point, and I am pleased that you're brought it up. We must talk sometime. – Greg Lee Oct 30 '16 at 22:24
  • 1
    Unlike 'peanut butter', 'post office', 'football' and 'teapot', 'Cromwell business' (or 'Ashworth / Baxter / Crabtree / Davis ... business' // 'Danish butter' / 'rancid butter') has not fused two words to make a new single lexeme. The latter are premodifier (whether adjective or noun) + head noun: two lexemes. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 08:20
  • @EdwinAshworth, How do you know that? – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 13:47
  • Partly from non-compositionality (peanut butter isn't butter made from peanuts, but Danish butter is butter produced in Denmark), but mainly because 'football' is listed in most dictionaries whereas 'rancid butter' isn't. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 14:51
  • @EdwinAshworth I've said "Cromwell business" is a noun, which makes it a word. This agrees with every account I've ever seen of compound nouns. Evidently you disagree. I'm asking why. Are you saying it's not a word because it is not in a dictionary? Linguists sometimes make dictionaries. If I were to make a dictionary and put "Cromwell business" in it, would you change your mind and agree that it is a word? You seem to be merely appealing to opinion. – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 15:06
  • Fascinating. 'I've said "Cromwell business" is a noun, which makes it a word.' And you then say 'You seem to be merely appealing to opinion.' // I say 'Cromwell business' is a noun phrase consisting of two words. Ask a few others here. Let's not just trot out our own opinions. Would you call 'Zika virus business' a noun? I doubt it. Here is a perfectly acceptable informal example found on the internet: 'On a serious note, this Zika virus business is terrifying.' – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 16:06
  • @EdwinAshworth Yes, I would call "Zika virus business" a word. When one says that a compound noun is a noun made from two nouns, it follows that either of those nouns might itself be a compound. Your example is made from the two nouns "Zika virus" and "business". Why do you doubt it is a word? Are you going by the spelling with internal spaces? – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 16:18
  • You seem to be confusing 'noun' and 'noun phrase'. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 16:19
  • @EdwinAshworth, No, I am pretty clear about the difference between N and NP. A NP can contain an article and various sorts of modifiers. A N cannot contain an article nor any modifier. – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 16:24
  • 'Modifier' then. CGEL (p444) has 'Internal modifiers in pre-head position are realised by DPs, AdjPs ... and nominals in plain or genitive case ... eg those Egyptian cotton shirts'. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 19:06
  • @EdwinAshworth There was a long discussion of this earlier, though I don't know just where. I don't think the CGEL treatment is correct. The first parts of these compounds are simply nouns -- they are not modifiers. I am not aware of any syntactic evidence that they are modifiers. They sometimes have the same interpretation as an adjective would, but sometimes they have the sense of a complement or whatever. But that is not syntactic evidence. – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 20:51
  • I'm not keen on everything in CGEL either. But I do mention when I disagree with people of say Pullum's reputation that there are other opinions. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 20:58
  • I don't know about your example Egyptian cotton shirt. It has end stress, so it might not be a compound noun. – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 20:59
  • I seem to remember that the end-stress test didn't give reliable results either. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 31 '16 at 21:00
  • That is so. It's why I wrote might not. – Greg Lee Oct 31 '16 at 21:23