There is now a greater awareness of problems such as these.
How would you parse the words “such as” here?
I think “such as” = “like” and we could call it a preposition in the sentence.
However, I consulted my dictionaries and none of them list “such” as a preposition.
Please tell me your opinion.
Thanks.
I shall give you information from three of my favorite books. You may then decide which answer you decide to accept or not accept.
“Such as” is a “fossilized conjunction.” [My note: That means that it is a set phrase. Do not try to analyze each word.]
Source: House and Harman, DESCRIPTIVE ENGLISH GRAMMAR (1950), pages 194 and 258.
“Such as” is one of those introductory words that “are usually called coordinating conjunctions.” [The author points out, however, that this kind of “coordinating conjunction” is different from the coordinating conjunctions such as “and.”]
Source: Paul Roberts, UNDERSTANDING GRAMMAR (1954), pages 256 - 257.
“Such as” is an “explantory conjunction.”
a. “She possessed certain definite beauties, such as her hair.”
i. The scholar says that you could substitute “as” or “like” for “such as” in that sentence.
ii. “The mistletoe grows on various trees, such as oaks, poplars, birches.”
Source: George Oliver Curme, A GRAMMAR OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (1931), Vol. II, pages 168 - 169.
I really like the first explanation. However, I have another question. Is the conjunction always followed by a noun? If so, why don’t we call it a preposition?
I would like to know more about introductory words.
Does “introductory words” mean “words that introduce something”?
I just consulted the term “explanatory conjunction” in many dictionaries, books…
Is the definition correct?
“explanatory conjunction” = “A conjunction used to introduce an explanation of a previously mentioned sentential element.”
a) She possessed certain definite beauties, such as her hair.
b) She possessed certain definite beauties, as her hair.
c) She possessed certain definite beauties, like her hair.
I can, however, list some more examples of explanatory conjunctions given by Dr. Curme. Then you can decide.
a. There is one way to solving the difficulty – NAMELY, to publish both articles.
b. The play was flung on “cold” – THAT IS, without an out-of-town try-out.
c. My wife suggested my going alone, I.E., with you and without her.
(I capitalized the explanatory conjunctions.)
[2] I think that you are spot-on.
[3] That seems to be a good definition.
[4] According to Dr. Curme, when “as” and “like” have the same meaning as “such as” in a sentence, then they are also called “explanatory conjunctions.”
a. The following is only my opinion.
i. “Like” would be a preposition in something such as “Mona looks like her mother.” As you can see, it is different from an explanatory conjunction. You could not say “Mona looks such as her mother.” Oh, I forgot: another explanatory conjunction is “For example.” So maybe we can say that when “as” and “like” and other words have the idea of “for example,” then they are called explanatory conjunctions.
(a) If you have an older grammar, it will tell you that “like” is really an adjective. That is: Mona looks like UNTO her mother."
But in modern English, it is just parsed as a preposition.