I suppose because we normally qualify objects like that, with size coming
first. If you have a convention like that it's easier to emphasise an
extraordinary situation by changing the order.
But I have no problem with analysing such conventions, but the article was
simplistic in the way many such articles turn out. It reminded me of US news
programmes. At a certain stage in the programme they have to have their
light-hearted news story, so one news reader turns to the other and says
something like, "I bet if I said 'brown big dog' to you, Jim, you would be a
little surprised, because you see . . ." and the other would express humorous
surprise and turn to the camera with some witty quip with which to end the
programme.
A similar technique is used at the end of pretty well any weekly programme in
the mould of "Murder she wrote.": it has to end with a joke with the whole cast
smiling. It's ghastly, and the idea is catching on Over Here :-(
Chris
On 11 Aug 14, at 22:02, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree... but why?
>
> On 8/11/2014 12:45 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> That order could be changed, John, although it would look and sound odd.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On 10 Aug 14, at 21:25, John Hudson <OM4T@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> big brown dog !
>>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|