Grammatical correctness of "With all things vampire"

Question

I came across this sentence:

"That was the year the Twilight movie was going to come out, and the kids were agog with all things vampire." — Shelley Dorrill (From Merriam-Webster's definition of 1.Agog)

I did quick search and this quote apparently comes from an interview with the author Shelley Dorrill.

Since vampire is a noun this sentence struck me as incorrect. I would have expected "the kids were agog with all things vampire-like/vampire-related" or, more so, "the kids were agog with all vampire-like/vampire-related things".

Was the interview setting that allowed for a laxer interaction (but then, why did MW dictionary choose to put this as a paradigmatic sentence?) or is it indeed grammatically correct?

Why do you dislike it? Would you accept "with all vampire things"? — Stuart F, Jul 31 '22 at 18:40
@StuartF it sounds weird to me the ([noun] + "things") or the ("things" + [noun]) constructions. I would expect an adjective instead of a noun in this case. — q0mlm, Jul 31 '22 at 18:54
Closely related, though they take the grammaticalness as a given: What does "All things X" mean?; "princess of all things shoes" what does this phrase mean? — Michael Seifert, Jul 31 '22 at 18:59
It's using "vampire" as an abbreviation for "related to vampires" — Barmar, Aug 01 '22 at 22:13
There is nothing wrong with 'all things vampire.' If there was a doubt there, I suggest it would be using 'agog with' rather than 'agog at…' — Robbie Goodwin, Sep 02 '22 at 23:10

Grammatical correctness of "With all things vampire"

0 Answers0