English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-07-26 13:50:44 · 7 answers · asked by flawless701 1 in Education & Reference Words & Wordplay

7 answers

Yes it is.

adj. shal·low·er, shal·low·est

Measuring little from bottom to top or surface; lacking physical depth.
Lacking depth of intellect, emotion, or knowledge: "This is a shallow parody of America" (Lloyd Rose).
Marked by insufficient inhalation of air; weak: shallow respirations.
In the part of a playing area that is closer to home plate: shallow left field.

n. A part of a body of water of little depth; a shoal. Often used in the plural: abandoned the boat in the shallows.

2007-07-26 13:56:38 · answer #1 · answered by ghouly05 7 · 0 1

Perhaps a few folks need to crack open their dictionaries!

Yes, "shallower" is the standard comparative form of "shallow" (and "shallowest" is the superlative.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/shallow

I think what throws people it the fact that the TYPICAL way of forming the comparative for adjectives longer than one syllable is to say "more ----"

In other words, most one-syllable adjectives (but not all!!) add -er; most two-syllable adjectives use 'more...'

Examples:
steep >> steeper
big >> bigger
fitting >> more fitting
common >> more common
unusual >> more unusual
(one-syllable exception: fun >> more fun)

But there are many two-syllable adjectives that form comparatives by adding -er. One common type is an adjective that ends with an unaccented vowel.

This includes words ends with y (as people often know):
happy >> happier, funny >> funnier

But it ALSO includes several words ending with an /o/ sound, such as: narrower, sallower, callower
(exception - "thorougher" is technically allowed, but "more thorough" is more commonly used)

Incidentally, another set of two-syllable adjectives that may take the suffixes, is forms that end up still being pronounced as having two-syllables after the change, e.g., -ple/-ble words-- abler, humbler, simpler, nobler

2007-07-26 14:14:34 · answer #2 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 1

No, I think you would need to say more shallow.

2007-07-26 13:55:57 · answer #3 · answered by Heidi K 3 · 2 0

No, you'd say more shallow.

2007-07-26 13:56:27 · answer #4 · answered by dcc045 5 · 1 1

nope, youd say more shallow

2007-07-26 14:05:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Yes. At least in my dictionary.

2007-07-26 13:58:54 · answer #6 · answered by Mary W 1 · 0 0

It is.

2007-07-26 13:55:40 · answer #7 · answered by Luciano D. 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers