newly built

< Previous | Next >

Takahero

Senior Member
Japanese
Hello.
When a participle is used with a modifier, it is postposed after a noun.

A lot of tourists visiting Japan tries sushi.

But in the following sentence, why is built put before mall?

The newly built mall near the station is crowded on weekends.

Is the following sentence wrong?

The mall newly built near the station is crowded on weekends.

Hello.
 
  • perpend

    Banned
    American English
    Is the following sentence wrong?

    The mall newly built near the station is crowded on weekends.
    With commas, I think it's okay: The mall, newly built, near the station is crowded on weekends.

    The idiomatic way remains "The newly built mall near ..." = No commas.
     

    entangledbank

    Senior Member
    English - South-East England
    It is postposed when it has a post-modifier: 'visiting' is followed by its object 'Japan', so 'visiting Japan' follows the main noun. 'Built' has a pre-modifier 'newly', so 'newly built' precedes its noun. The preposition phrase 'near the station' is ambiguous as to what it's attached to. It could be a modifier of the main noun 'mall' (the mall is near the station), which then has two separate modifiers, one before and one after:

    the newly built mall near the station

    Or it could be a modifier of 'built' (it was built near the station), which then has a post-modifier as well as a pre-modifier, and this whole phrase therefore has to follow the noun:

    the mall newly built near the station

    Of course once a mall is built near a station, it tends to stay near the station (barring earthquakes and freak weather), so these are equivalent; but it could make a difference with, for example, a newly assembled machine in a factory and a machine newly assembled in a factory.
     

    Takahero

    Senior Member
    Japanese
    With commas, I think it's okay: The mall, newly built, near the station is crowded on weekends.

    The idiomatic way remains "The newly built mall near ..." = No commas.
    Thank you for your reply.

    I have a question:why do we need commas?
     

    Tazzler

    Senior Member
    American English
    The commas represent the pause that would be present in a natural reading of "the mall newly built". They also make clear that we're dealing with an apposition. Let's make a list of the possibilites:

    The mall, newly built, attracts many visitors. (The commas set off the apposition; otherwise it'd be a restrictive reading (the newly built mall in contrast to other malls) and ungrammatical as it'd have to be "the newly built mall.)
    The newly built mall attracts many visitors (In contrast to other malls).
     

    gramman

    Senior Member
    The mall, newly built, near the station is crowded on weekends.
    At first, I thought this sentence probably needed commas, but placed differently:

    The mall, newly built near the station, is crowded on weekends.

    But that still seems a bit awkward to me. Now I'd say Parla's suggestion works. It takes a while to get to "is crowded," but … not too long.

    The best choice, it seems to me, is one offered by Takahero:

    The newly built mall near the station is crowded on weekends.

    I'm certainly not qualified to answer your enquiry directly, but it seems to me that your postulate:
    When a participle is used with a modifier, it is postposed after a noun.
    is of questionable validity, perhaps along the lines suggested by entangledbank.
     
    Last edited:

    Takahero

    Senior Member
    Japanese
    Thank you, gramman.

    Some participles such as built, read cannot be used alone.
    e.g. ×The built mall is crowded on the weekends.

    But they can be used before nouns when modified by adverbs.
    e.g. The newly built mall is crowded on the weekends.
    A newly arrived visitor is very tall.

    Why is it possible to use the participles before nouns when modified by adverbs?
     

    gramman

    Senior Member
    I'm just guessing here (nothing new), but I don't think the use of an adverb is determinative. The examples you offered (built, read) are transitive — they require a direct object. So it may be that you can't say "the built mall" for the same reason you can't say "I built." Understand that I have little or no idea what I'm talking about.

    << Links deleted. See note below. >>

    +++++

    found one more:
    Some more past participles can only be used in this way in phrases with adverbs

    a well-read person

    a much-traveled man

    recently arrived immigrants

    from Participial Adjectives
    Maybe you're right about adverbs.

    << See English Only guideline: Posting links. >>
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    entangledbank

    Senior Member
    English - South-East England
    I started by thinking it was because without an adverb the participle would be vacuous: a built shop as opposed to what other kind (a planned shop)? But it wouldn't be at all vacuous with the (intransitive, note) 'arrived'. We are often waiting for, and thinking and talking about, people who have not yet arrived, so it would be quite natural to talk about :cross:arrived guests. So I don't know why we can't.
     

    Andygc

    Senior Member
    British English
    Some participles such as built, read cannot be used alone.
    Not wholly true. The built environment is a commonly-used phrase referring to areas which have been developed by building. See the "In context" link from our dictionary for examples - here
     

    gramman

    Senior Member
    Just adding to the pile for more knowledgeable types to perhaps comment on:

    The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English describes "built environment" as chiefly BE.

    Other terms that come to mind are "purpose-built" and "custom-built."
    Built to last, the great pyramids of Egypt may be around for the next millennium. Notice that the phrase "built to last" works as an adjective to describe the word pyramids; therefore, it is a participial phrase. — from "Irregular Participles," in Adding Variety to Your Writing, on slideserve.com
    A rather obscure, and I suppose irrelevant in this context, definition of "built":
    ((used of soaps or cleaning agents) having a substance (an abrasive or filler) added to increase effectiveness) "the built liquid detergents" — on WordNet
    Finally, here's a WRF thread that may be totally unrelated, but …: Some participles can modify a noun from the top, some can't. Why?

    Sorry if this is all off-topic.
     

    gramman

    Senior Member
    I found another document that (may) deal with this issue:
    And then there's given and built, which pass neither the very test nor (in my mind) the become test, but are nevertheless adjectives. Admittedly, their adjectival meaning is a specialization of the past participial one; is that generally true of Adjs that don't pass these tests? — Adjectives and past participles, on English, Jack: Second thoughts on English and how she's taught.
    Regarding the use of/need for commas:
    If the participle or participial phrase comes in the middle of a sentence, it should be set off with commas only if the information is not essential to the meaning of the sentence.
    • Sid, watching an old movie, drifted in and out of sleep.
    • The church, destroyed by a fire, was never rebuilt.
    Note that if the participial phrase is essential to the meaning of the sentence, no commas should be used:
    • The student earning the highest grade point average will receive a special award.
    • The guy wearing the chicken costume is my cousin.
    Participles from The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University
    The wording used here — "should … only if" seems to suggest that commas can be employed. Should they? I can't say.

    In the end, I must abandon my efforts to answer your enquiry: "Why is it possible to use the participles before nouns when modified by adverbs?" As I said earlier, and as entangledbank seems to confirm, you original observation:

    >>When a participle is used with a modifier, it is [necessarily] postposed after a noun.

    does not appear to be true. The following examples, if properly constructed, argue against it:
    Finally, he emphasised the distinction which, in his opinion, ought to be drawn as to the conditions which could be demanded in factories newly built and those obtainable in existing premises. — Annual Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops for the Year 1904.
    … coefficients applied, which depend, in the skin resistance, on the roughness of surface, which is identical for all iron or steel structures newly built and painted, … — Journal of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies, Volume 23, 1880.
    He suggested houses newly built and unoccupied should be taxed as inventory rather than personal property. — Minutes of the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee, on kslegislature.org
    He said that he saw there "a number of houses, newly built and close together as in Havana, … — Mary R. Bullard, Cumberland Island: A History, 2005).
    The tension between the fullness of the paint and the emptiness of a room recalled houses newly built and not yet lived in, … — John Yau, Eve Eriksson, on The Brooklyn Rail.
    Behind our house is a row of vacant houses, newly built and up for sale. — Face to face with an intruder, on handmadetearsandtriumphs.com
    There's even a mall, newly built: ☺
    Popkorn, the capital’s third — and arguably the most “homelike” — multiplex is all set to debut at the five-storey Galaxia mall, newly built on an acre on Ratu Road, with a bouquet of Bollywood blockbusters after Diwali. — Pop-eyed in plush plex three: Dual-screen cinema Popkorn to regale capital cine-goers after Diwali, on telegraphindia.com
    The use of commas seems to be optional.
     

    Takahero

    Senior Member
    Japanese
    Thank you for your reply.

    From the discussion above, both a and b seem acceptable.

    a.The newly built mall near the station is crowded on weekends.
    b.The mall newly built near the station is crowded on weekends.

    If they are acceptable, what is the difference in meaning?
     

    gramman

    Senior Member
    It looks like they're both acceptable, but perhaps a bit awkward. To be honest, my suggestion would be to reword them, perhaps with something like:

    The mall, newly built and located near the station, is crowded on weekends.

    This allows the reader to comfortably gather all the information being offered about the mall's construction before moving on to what's being said about the level of activity there.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top