Why does "large red barn" sound wrong, despite the supposed synonymic status of "big" and "large"? Or, if it doesn't sound wrong, why does it tend to give the impression of a very different meaning?
I don't think there are such things as pure synonyms, and I also don't believe that "big" and "red" are distinct adjectives in the headline phrase. Rather, they have formed a new "adjective phrase" that has new meaning beyond the sum of the meanings of the individual words. This isn't so strange, the words themselves have more meaning than the sum of the letters' meaning.
Thus if you say "red big barn", not only are you avoiding the meaning of the more orthodox phrase, you're showing off that you're not describing it the way others do. If I called a red balloon green, you'd point that out too and think I spoke funny. Same thing here.
"Big red barn" is not just saying that the barn is big and also red. It conveys the sense of a certain type of barn, in a certain part of the world, in a certain era. Surely if we were to find some large cattle shack in the Scottish highlands and paint it red, it would fail to become a "big red barn". Or if we found some Sound-of-Music-esque farm building in Switzerland and we diligently painted it, that too would fail to become a "big red barn".
The most amazing part of all this, to me, is how blind everyone is to it.
"Big red barn" is not just saying that the barn is big and also red. It conveys the sense of a certain type of barn, in a certain part of the world, in a certain era.
That's because of the color. Skim milk, lime, iron oxide, and linseed oil turns out to make a nice hardwearing paint, and is dark enough to make the interior a bit warmer. The recipe caught on among US farmers in the 19th century and red barns became a distinctive US style.
The most amazing part of all this, to me, is how blind everyone is to it.
Possibly because it only exists in your imagination.
It doesn't. Certainly not as wrong as "red large barn". It might sound unfamiliar because it's not a cliche, but it sounds like a perfectly valid English noun phrase.
If you wander around the children's department of a book shop (especially here in the UK) you would soon realise what a ridiculous statement that is.
I was in Waterston's children's department (UK bookseller chain) this weekend and found myself amazed at the sheer diversity of kids books. There was a multitude of amazing kids titles full of bonkers ideas and fascinating fun prose (a lot of it made up of made up words and interesting sounds). There were also weird and wonderful illustrations to join them.
Myself and my kids browsed and laughed and (in one case - 'Goodbye Mog' - cried (although the language of the book is traditional, the subject matter - death - was unusual for a kids book)). lemony Snicker is also a case of inventive ideas rather than inventive language. But we picked up all sorts of weird books with strange language and big colourful pictures.
I came back impressed thinking that the kids book market was in a healthy imaginative state and wishing I went to 'rea'l book shops more often — you don't get a real sense of what is out there from an online bookstore. I'd forgotten how wonderful browsing was.
> you don't get a real sense of what is out there from an online bookstore. I'd forgotten how wonderful browsing was.
Yeah, I've found great stuff just browsing near other category-sorted books in a university library. It's so disappointing that nothing similar exists online, either for fiction or nonfiction.
I'd love to see someone build a properly "curated" virtual bookstore with a great interface. Sell me things I don't yet know I want. Give me weird niches like occult bookstores as well. This can all exist online, but nobody has really done it.
I don't think there are such things as pure synonyms, and I also don't believe that "big" and "red" are distinct adjectives in the headline phrase. Rather, they have formed a new "adjective phrase" that has new meaning beyond the sum of the meanings of the individual words. This isn't so strange, the words themselves have more meaning than the sum of the letters' meaning.
Thus if you say "red big barn", not only are you avoiding the meaning of the more orthodox phrase, you're showing off that you're not describing it the way others do. If I called a red balloon green, you'd point that out too and think I spoke funny. Same thing here.
"Big red barn" is not just saying that the barn is big and also red. It conveys the sense of a certain type of barn, in a certain part of the world, in a certain era. Surely if we were to find some large cattle shack in the Scottish highlands and paint it red, it would fail to become a "big red barn". Or if we found some Sound-of-Music-esque farm building in Switzerland and we diligently painted it, that too would fail to become a "big red barn".
The most amazing part of all this, to me, is how blind everyone is to it.