“She very wants to do it” instead of “She wants to do it very much”

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP

Is the sentence

"She very wants to do it."

could be correct in a meaning of:

She wants to do it very much.

I mean to ask if it is a grammatical sentence at all.

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

1

Your first version is completely ungrammatical. But there's nothing wrong with She wants very much to do it, or She very much wants to do it. Which although far less common would often be used with exactly the sense of your second version. Maybe just a personal thing, but I might be more likely to use one of those "less common" versions if robustly refuting someone who'd just claimed that she didn't really want to do it at all.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 18:15

Thank you very much. Please put our things as an answer rather than a comment. It helped me. Secondly, I'd like to ask you if there's other ways to say "She wants to do it very much". Indeed you suggested that it can be possible to change the place of "very much" in the sentence, but I'm asking about other ways if you know. Thank you.
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 18:19

1

I didn't post an "Answer" because I didn't know if you'd simply made a typo when you omitted much from your first version. Presumably not, since you haven't edited your question text to "correct" it. But honestly, my comment has nothing to do with what seems to be your real problem here - the difference between very (which can't be used adverbially to "intensify" the verb wants) and really (which is perfectly fine as an adverbial intensifier in She really wants to do it).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:00

Ok, I understand. Thank you very much. I lerant a new thing today (that "really" can be in a meaning of "very much".).
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 19:40

add a comment |

Is the sentence

"She very wants to do it."

could be correct in a meaning of:

She wants to do it very much.

I mean to ask if it is a grammatical sentence at all.

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

1

Your first version is completely ungrammatical. But there's nothing wrong with She wants very much to do it, or She very much wants to do it. Which although far less common would often be used with exactly the sense of your second version. Maybe just a personal thing, but I might be more likely to use one of those "less common" versions if robustly refuting someone who'd just claimed that she didn't really want to do it at all.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 18:15

Thank you very much. Please put our things as an answer rather than a comment. It helped me. Secondly, I'd like to ask you if there's other ways to say "She wants to do it very much". Indeed you suggested that it can be possible to change the place of "very much" in the sentence, but I'm asking about other ways if you know. Thank you.
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 18:19

1

I didn't post an "Answer" because I didn't know if you'd simply made a typo when you omitted much from your first version. Presumably not, since you haven't edited your question text to "correct" it. But honestly, my comment has nothing to do with what seems to be your real problem here - the difference between very (which can't be used adverbially to "intensify" the verb wants) and really (which is perfectly fine as an adverbial intensifier in She really wants to do it).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:00

Ok, I understand. Thank you very much. I lerant a new thing today (that "really" can be in a meaning of "very much".).
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 19:40

add a comment |

Is the sentence

"She very wants to do it."

could be correct in a meaning of:

She wants to do it very much.

I mean to ask if it is a grammatical sentence at all.

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

Is the sentence

"She very wants to do it."

could be correct in a meaning of:

She wants to do it very much.

I mean to ask if it is a grammatical sentence at all.

adverbs word-order intensifiers

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

edited Dec 15 at 20:11

Jasper

17.4k43366

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

asked Dec 15 at 17:50

Perplexed folks

11.2k55180315

1

Your first version is completely ungrammatical. But there's nothing wrong with She wants very much to do it, or She very much wants to do it. Which although far less common would often be used with exactly the sense of your second version. Maybe just a personal thing, but I might be more likely to use one of those "less common" versions if robustly refuting someone who'd just claimed that she didn't really want to do it at all.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 18:15

Thank you very much. Please put our things as an answer rather than a comment. It helped me. Secondly, I'd like to ask you if there's other ways to say "She wants to do it very much". Indeed you suggested that it can be possible to change the place of "very much" in the sentence, but I'm asking about other ways if you know. Thank you.
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 18:19

1

I didn't post an "Answer" because I didn't know if you'd simply made a typo when you omitted much from your first version. Presumably not, since you haven't edited your question text to "correct" it. But honestly, my comment has nothing to do with what seems to be your real problem here - the difference between very (which can't be used adverbially to "intensify" the verb wants) and really (which is perfectly fine as an adverbial intensifier in She really wants to do it).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:00

Ok, I understand. Thank you very much. I lerant a new thing today (that "really" can be in a meaning of "very much".).
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 19:40

add a comment |

1

Your first version is completely ungrammatical. But there's nothing wrong with She wants very much to do it, or She very much wants to do it. Which although far less common would often be used with exactly the sense of your second version. Maybe just a personal thing, but I might be more likely to use one of those "less common" versions if robustly refuting someone who'd just claimed that she didn't really want to do it at all.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 18:15

Thank you very much. Please put our things as an answer rather than a comment. It helped me. Secondly, I'd like to ask you if there's other ways to say "She wants to do it very much". Indeed you suggested that it can be possible to change the place of "very much" in the sentence, but I'm asking about other ways if you know. Thank you.
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 18:19

1

I didn't post an "Answer" because I didn't know if you'd simply made a typo when you omitted much from your first version. Presumably not, since you haven't edited your question text to "correct" it. But honestly, my comment has nothing to do with what seems to be your real problem here - the difference between very (which can't be used adverbially to "intensify" the verb wants) and really (which is perfectly fine as an adverbial intensifier in She really wants to do it).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:00

Ok, I understand. Thank you very much. I lerant a new thing today (that "really" can be in a meaning of "very much".).
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 19:40

Your first version is completely ungrammatical. But there's nothing wrong with She wants very much to do it, or She very much wants to do it. Which although far less common would often be used with exactly the sense of your second version. Maybe just a personal thing, but I might be more likely to use one of those "less common" versions if robustly refuting someone who'd just claimed that she didn't really want to do it at all.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 18:15

Thank you very much. Please put our things as an answer rather than a comment. It helped me. Secondly, I'd like to ask you if there's other ways to say "She wants to do it very much". Indeed you suggested that it can be possible to change the place of "very much" in the sentence, but I'm asking about other ways if you know. Thank you.
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 18:19

I didn't post an "Answer" because I didn't know if you'd simply made a typo when you omitted much from your first version. Presumably not, since you haven't edited your question text to "correct" it. But honestly, my comment has nothing to do with what seems to be your real problem here - the difference between very (which can't be used adverbially to "intensify" the verb wants) and really (which is perfectly fine as an adverbial intensifier in She really wants to do it).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:00

Ok, I understand. Thank you very much. I lerant a new thing today (that "really" can be in a meaning of "very much".).
– Perplexed folks
Dec 15 at 19:40

add a comment |

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

No, “very” is a qualifier that is used to add more detail to a noun or adjective’s meaning (for example “she was very happy”) and so can’t come before a verb.

In the example “She very wants to do it” the word “really” would be correct, changing the sentence to “She really wants to do it”. “Really” has a very similar meaning in this context and can be used to enhance a verb.

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

1

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

1

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

|
show 1 more comment

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);

);

draft saved

draft discarded

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f189665%2fshe-very-wants-to-do-it-instead-of-she-wants-to-do-it-very-much%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

No, “very” is a qualifier that is used to add more detail to a noun or adjective’s meaning (for example “she was very happy”) and so can’t come before a verb.

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

1

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

1

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

|
show 1 more comment

No, “very” is a qualifier that is used to add more detail to a noun or adjective’s meaning (for example “she was very happy”) and so can’t come before a verb.

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

1

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

1

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

|
show 1 more comment

No, “very” is a qualifier that is used to add more detail to a noun or adjective’s meaning (for example “she was very happy”) and so can’t come before a verb.

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

No, “very” is a qualifier that is used to add more detail to a noun or adjective’s meaning (for example “she was very happy”) and so can’t come before a verb.

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

edited Dec 15 at 19:04

FumbleFingers

43.6k153117

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

answered Dec 15 at 18:34

Mandy R

1511

1

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

1

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

|
show 1 more comment

1

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

1

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

Very nicely summarised!
– FumbleFingers
Dec 15 at 19:02

I don't think it is standard to apply "very" to a noun. It works with adjectives and adverbs.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 15 at 23:43

@HenningMakholm: There are hundreds of hits in Google Books for It's very me - probably mostly with the the idiomatic sense of typical of / suitable for me (usually in respect of an action, attitude, or item of clothing).
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 13:08

@FumbleFingers: "Me" isn't a noun either. "Very me" derives (or derived) humorous character by being doubly removed form standard usage: First e.g. "It's very John", where the name "John" was recast as a (predicative) adjective to mean "typical of John's style", and then by substituting "me" for "John". Today broad usage had made it more of a set idiom, but that doesn't mean it's grammatically standard.
– Henning Makholm
Dec 16 at 15:01

@HenningMakholm: I think you're using a somewhat circular definition there. Most people would say that [pro]noun me is indeed an "objective case" noun, but you're effectively saying that it can't be - because very only works with adjectives and adverbs. I'd say it's not so much that my cited usage is "non-standard" - more a matter of saying that most "grammar rules" are just a crude attempt to codify actual usage (which imho by definition defines "grammaticality").
– FumbleFingers
Dec 16 at 15:18

|
show 1 more comment

draft saved

draft discarded

Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.

Please pay close attention to the following guidance:

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

draft saved

draft discarded

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

搜尋此網誌

mjhjmtu