On 09/07/18 22:34, Madrigal Gurneyhalt wrote:
> On Monday, 9 July 2018 13:06:49 UTC+1, Harrison Hill wrote:
>> On Monday, 9 July 2018 00:50:26 UTC+1, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 1) His guitar was strange. He could barely touch the string and get a loud sound.
>>> 2) His guitar was strange. He could hardly touch the string and get a loud sound.
>>> His guitar was strange. He could touch it very softly and get a loud noise.
>>> Are '1' and '2' grammatical with the given meaning?
>>> Are they idiomatic?
>> If a guitar can be so strange that the only way you can play it,
>> is to just about touch the string to get a very quiet sound, then that
>> is what 1 and 2 mean.
>> "Scarcely" could replace "barely" and "hardly", without affecting
>> the meaning; and "string" for "strings" is good English - using one
>> item to represent many items must have a name in grammar.
> Piffle! "Barely" has an entirely different meaning to "scarcely" in this
> context and it is "scarcely" which is the correct choice.
> "He could barely touch the string and get a loud noise" clearly implies
> that he was only just capable of hitting the string hard enough to get
> a loud sound probably because of some physical impediment.
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia