noun+noun = noun for\of noun

< Previous | Next >

yakor

Senior Member
Russian
Hi! There are a lot of noun phrases like
-Car doors, a women's shop, a Peter's shirt...
all they are the same as doors of car, a shop of women's, the shirt of Peter's.
Are any noun phrases "noun+noun" when they came from the noun phrase like "noun for noun"?
"a book for reading"--->a reading book. Or did the reading book come from the book of reading too?
Your examples?
 
  • Uncle Jack

    Senior Member
    British English
    The two things are only very rarely the same.

    It might be worth considering "a Peter's shirt" first, as this is an unusual example. It can only mean a shirt that was sold by, or is branded "Peter's" (or possibly "Peter", if the business is commonly known as "Peter's", as is the case with the clothing retailer "Burton" in the UK). With the indefinite article, it cannot mean a shirt belonging to Peter.

    On the other hand, "A shirt of Peter's" can only mean a shirt belonging to (or that once belonged to) Peter. It cannot mean that Peter's is the brand of the shirt. An alternative form with this meaning is "Peter's shirt", with no article.

    "A women's shop" is another good example. It cannot mean "a shop of women's", since this phrase is meaningless. It can only mean a shop for women (a shop that women use).

    It may be possible to swap "car doors" with "doors of a car" ("car", being a singular countable noun, must have an article), but "car doors" can refer to a type of thing whereas "doors of a car" can only really refer to specific objects.

    As you can see, there is no general rule here. It depends on the meaning of the phrase.
     

    PaulQ

    Senior Member
    UK
    English - England
    Noun1 + noun2 = noun2 associated with noun1 -> the language department
    Gerund + noun = noun2 associated with gerund -> a racing horse/a hearing aid/a walking stick.

    In noun1 for/of noun2, the "for/of noun2" is an adjectival phrase modifying noun1 in some way. Door handle - the key for the door /the key of the door / the key associated with the door.

    As you see, very broadly, it is still noun2 associated with noun1.
     

    yakor

    Senior Member
    Russian
    The two things are only very rarely the same.
    Which things? "For" and "of"? Yes, but one doesn't contradict the other.

    It might be worth considering "a Peter's shirt" ..
    "Peter's shirt", with no article.
    But all the way this brend came from the sense of "Peter's shirt"(a shirt of(for) Peter's (Peter)" "Peter's" is an attributive.

    "A women's shop" is another good example. It cannot mean "a shop of women's"
    Yes. But "a women's shop", by the way, has something to do with "a shop of women"(the original, beginning) and at the same time "for" them and only. 's" was added to stress that it is their, women's shop. "women's" is an attributive.
    It may be possible to swap "car doors" with "doors of a car" ("car", being a singular countable noun, must have an article), but "car doors" can refer to a type of thing whereas "doors of a car" can only really refer to specific objects.
    But the idea of "car doors" came from the "doors of a car".
    As you can see, there is no general rule here. It depends on the meaning of the phrase.
    Yes, I agree. But an origin is always clear. A noun phrase could come from several ideas, points, by combining them.
     

    Uncle Jack

    Senior Member
    British English
    Which things? "For" and "of"? Yes, but one doesn't contradict the other.
    The things described by [Noun A] [Noun B] and [Noun B] of [Noun A] are only very rarely the same.

    I see no point in thinking that one expression came from another expression. A "a women's shop" has nothing to do with "a shop of women" , whatever that may be, one staffed entirely by women. perhaps.
     

    yakor

    Senior Member
    Russian
    The things described by [Noun A] [Noun B] and [Noun B] of [Noun A] are only very rarely the same.
    Who says that they are the same or could be?:eek:
    I see no point in thinking that one expression came from another expression. A "a women's shop" has nothing to do with "a shop of women" , whatever that may be, one staffed entirely by women. perhaps.
    Yes, but the distributive "women's" for a shop could come from the different senses.
    Is it possible that it was founded by two or several women, so it is "a shop of women's", And this shop contained the items only for women. The shop of women (items).
    Taking it into consideration, it is clear that "a women's shop" is Ok.
    I thought he meant a knocking-shop. :eek:
    What do you mean?
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top