Florence Nightingale is admirable in working to establish the profession of nursing.


Senior Member
Japanese and Japan
For the blank, below, I understand #2 is suitable. But I’m not sure why #2 is not appropriate.

Florence Nightingale, who is ( ) working to establish the profession of nursing was also extremely able administrator.
1. well-known for
2. admirable in

Is it because only a “thing,” not a person, can be “admirable”?
Or is it because Florence Nightingale is not alive and so you do not say that she “is” admirable?
  • envie de voyager

    Senior Member
    Your second choice is correct. Because she has been dead for a long time, we say "was admirable." Since you do not need to be alive to be well-known, then we can use the present tense and say "is well-known."


    The easy answer is that to be gramatically correct, it should be admirable "for."

    But I would find that sentence awkward. One can certainly admire a person, but when I speak I say a person's qualities are admirable, not the person him or herself. The phrase "admirable person," however, comes up with close to a half million "google" hits, so I can't say it's wrong, just not what I would say.

    Hope this helps.
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >