This painting is nothing less than a copy of the other.

< Previous | Next >

philanguy

Senior Member
MotherEarth;Chinese
Hi,

--What's wrong with the following samples? Many thanks to you in advance.


--This painting is nothing less than a copy of the other.
--This painting is no less than a copy of the other.
 
  • philanguy

    Senior Member
    MotherEarth;Chinese
    Hi philanguy,

    Your sentences are understood by me and seem to be grammatical.

    Floise
    Thanks, Floise.
    My grammar book regards them as being wrong, so I'm curious about the meaning you perceived from them. Are they much about the same in meaning to you?
     

    tepatria

    Senior Member
    Canadian English
    I would say "This painting is nothing but a copy..." but your sentences are understandable and I would not mark them wrong. It is quite a strong way of saying the painting is not an original. It is a copy or it is fake - if you are trying to pass it off as the real thing.
     

    floise

    Senior Member
    U.S.;English
    Hi Philanguy,

    If you say that something is nothing less than ...., you mean that it is equal to....

    Her performance was nothing less than brilliant = Her peformance was brilliant.

    Their workmanship was nothing less than perfect = Their workmanship was perfect.

    What grammar book are you using?

    Floise
     

    philanguy

    Senior Member
    MotherEarth;Chinese
    I would say "This painting is nothing but a copy..." but your sentences are understandable and I would not mark them wrong. It is quite a strong way of saying the painting is not an original. It is a copy or it is fake - if you are trying to pass it off as the real thing.
    Many thanks to you tepatria.
    I like your replacement and your advice.

    Hi Philanguy,

    If you say that something is nothing less than ...., you mean that it is equal to....

    Her performance was nothing less than brilliant = Her peformance was brilliant.

    Their workmanship was nothing less than perfect = Their workmanship was perfect.

    What grammar book are you using?

    Floise
    Many thanks to you Floise.
    Now I see!
    As for the name of the grammar book, I'm going to save it because it's not worth mentioning. It's nothing much.
     

    Lexiphile

    Senior Member
    England English
    a Further point:
    Floise has put her finger on it: The problem with both of these sentences lies in "less than." Either a picture is a copy or it is not. It cannot be less than a copy or more than a copy.
    So the error is semantic rather than grammatical.
     

    Trisia

    Senior Member
    Romanian
    It cannot be less than a copy or more than a copy.
    So the error is semantic rather than grammatical.
    When I read the original post, my first thought was that the sentence should go like this: "This painting is nothing more than a copy."

    I'm not sure I understood you--did you say the above sentence would be wrong as well?
     

    Lexiphile

    Senior Member
    England English
    "Wrong" is a word I try to avoid in this forum. But yes, "more than a copy" suffers from the same problem.
    Your observation is, however, correct. You are much more likely to hear "more than" than "less than" in this context, but neither makes much sense. "Nothing other than" would be much better.
     

    GreenWhiteBlue

    Senior Member
    USA - English
    I don't see how "nothing more than..." is incorrect, and it makes a great deal of sense.

    The painting is a copy of the other; that much we have established. Is it also a great work of art, or something interesting to study, or a sample of another artist's work? No, it is none of those things: the only thing that can be said about it is that it is a copy of the other painting. Nothing MORE can be said about it, because the painting is nothing (that is, not anything) MORE than a copy.
     

    JamesM

    Senior Member
    I agree with GWB. I also think "nothing less than a copy" would work in an accusatory sentence. Copying a painting is a type of forgery. Someone might claim the second painting was an "hommage", an "interpretation", an "impression", or a "re-working" to avoid the stigma of forgery. Another person could reply: "The second panting is none of those things; it is nothing less than a (direct) copy of the other." In other words, the other artistic borrowings are minor infractions. This is nothing less than a complete and deliberate forgery.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top