Help to understand the use of 'but' in this sentence
They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses, but the front legs, wings and heads of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
I don't know why 'but' is used in this sentence. It seems to me that it could be either a conj. or prep. What's 'but' doing there? Will it change the meaning of the sentence?
-- From Harry Potter.
word-usage meaning-in-context word-meaning
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
add a comment |
They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses, but the front legs, wings and heads of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
I don't know why 'but' is used in this sentence. It seems to me that it could be either a conj. or prep. What's 'but' doing there? Will it change the meaning of the sentence?
-- From Harry Potter.
word-usage meaning-in-context word-meaning
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
1
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26
add a comment |
They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses, but the front legs, wings and heads of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
I don't know why 'but' is used in this sentence. It seems to me that it could be either a conj. or prep. What's 'but' doing there? Will it change the meaning of the sentence?
-- From Harry Potter.
word-usage meaning-in-context word-meaning
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses, but the front legs, wings and heads of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
I don't know why 'but' is used in this sentence. It seems to me that it could be either a conj. or prep. What's 'but' doing there? Will it change the meaning of the sentence?
-- From Harry Potter.
word-usage meaning-in-context word-meaning
word-usage meaning-in-context word-meaning
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
asked Nov 15 '18 at 11:54
dandan
5,42122878
5,42122878
1
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26
add a comment |
1
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26
1
1
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I agree with Michael Rybkin. I think that "but" is used as conjuction there.
At least according to the meaning established in the Oxford Dictionary
but [conjuction]
Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.
‘he stumbled but didn't fall’
‘this is one principle, but it is not
the only one’
‘the food is cheap but delicious’
‘the problem is not
that they are cutting down trees, but that they are doing it in a
predatory way’
contrast
The state of being strikingly different from something else in
juxtaposition or close association.
Some parts [horse-like] are strikingly different from the other parts [eagle-like].
I have highlighted an specific example above where you can observe that the verb is used only once, the ellipsis mentioned by @Tᴚoɯɐuo
The food is cheap but delicious.
The food is cheap but (it's) delicious.
You got the same case in your example. Let's simplify
They had horse-like bodies but eagle-like heads.
They had horse-like bodies but (they had) eagle-like heads.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
add a comment |
It had the head of a man but (had) the body of a lion.
It is a kind of ellipsis, I think. Perhaps there is a narrower technical term for it. The verb had is understood to govern both objects, the head of a man and the body of a lion.
So that but there joins two clauses in one of which the verb is merely understood to be present.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
add a comment |
Do you think you will better understand it if I restructure your quote like this:
Question: They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of what?
Answer: Of horses.
Question: But what did they have the front legs, wings and heads of?
Answer: Of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
Thus, technically speaking, but as used in your passage is a conjunction. It's making a contrast between different body parts that the creatures they're talking about have. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts which are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
add a 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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f185692%2fhelp-to-understand-the-use-of-but-in-this-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I agree with Michael Rybkin. I think that "but" is used as conjuction there.
At least according to the meaning established in the Oxford Dictionary
but [conjuction]
Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.
‘he stumbled but didn't fall’
‘this is one principle, but it is not
the only one’
‘the food is cheap but delicious’
‘the problem is not
that they are cutting down trees, but that they are doing it in a
predatory way’
contrast
The state of being strikingly different from something else in
juxtaposition or close association.
Some parts [horse-like] are strikingly different from the other parts [eagle-like].
I have highlighted an specific example above where you can observe that the verb is used only once, the ellipsis mentioned by @Tᴚoɯɐuo
The food is cheap but delicious.
The food is cheap but (it's) delicious.
You got the same case in your example. Let's simplify
They had horse-like bodies but eagle-like heads.
They had horse-like bodies but (they had) eagle-like heads.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
add a comment |
I agree with Michael Rybkin. I think that "but" is used as conjuction there.
At least according to the meaning established in the Oxford Dictionary
but [conjuction]
Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.
‘he stumbled but didn't fall’
‘this is one principle, but it is not
the only one’
‘the food is cheap but delicious’
‘the problem is not
that they are cutting down trees, but that they are doing it in a
predatory way’
contrast
The state of being strikingly different from something else in
juxtaposition or close association.
Some parts [horse-like] are strikingly different from the other parts [eagle-like].
I have highlighted an specific example above where you can observe that the verb is used only once, the ellipsis mentioned by @Tᴚoɯɐuo
The food is cheap but delicious.
The food is cheap but (it's) delicious.
You got the same case in your example. Let's simplify
They had horse-like bodies but eagle-like heads.
They had horse-like bodies but (they had) eagle-like heads.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
add a comment |
I agree with Michael Rybkin. I think that "but" is used as conjuction there.
At least according to the meaning established in the Oxford Dictionary
but [conjuction]
Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.
‘he stumbled but didn't fall’
‘this is one principle, but it is not
the only one’
‘the food is cheap but delicious’
‘the problem is not
that they are cutting down trees, but that they are doing it in a
predatory way’
contrast
The state of being strikingly different from something else in
juxtaposition or close association.
Some parts [horse-like] are strikingly different from the other parts [eagle-like].
I have highlighted an specific example above where you can observe that the verb is used only once, the ellipsis mentioned by @Tᴚoɯɐuo
The food is cheap but delicious.
The food is cheap but (it's) delicious.
You got the same case in your example. Let's simplify
They had horse-like bodies but eagle-like heads.
They had horse-like bodies but (they had) eagle-like heads.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
I agree with Michael Rybkin. I think that "but" is used as conjuction there.
At least according to the meaning established in the Oxford Dictionary
but [conjuction]
Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.
‘he stumbled but didn't fall’
‘this is one principle, but it is not
the only one’
‘the food is cheap but delicious’
‘the problem is not
that they are cutting down trees, but that they are doing it in a
predatory way’
contrast
The state of being strikingly different from something else in
juxtaposition or close association.
Some parts [horse-like] are strikingly different from the other parts [eagle-like].
I have highlighted an specific example above where you can observe that the verb is used only once, the ellipsis mentioned by @Tᴚoɯɐuo
The food is cheap but delicious.
The food is cheap but (it's) delicious.
You got the same case in your example. Let's simplify
They had horse-like bodies but eagle-like heads.
They had horse-like bodies but (they had) eagle-like heads.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
edited Nov 15 '18 at 15:58
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:19
RubioRicRubioRic
5,08911134
5,08911134
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
add a comment |
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
1
1
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
Right, I meant "conjunction". I don't know why I wrote "preposition". I was focused more on the semantics. I thought that if the OP understood what the sentence was saying, it wouldn't really matter whether but was used as a conjunction or preposition. Thanks for alerting me to this.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:22
1
1
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
@MichaelRybkin Ok, then I meant "agree" :-)
– RubioRic
Nov 15 '18 at 12:24
2
2
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
You could replace 'but' with 'and' here and it wouldn't change the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 15 '18 at 21:29
1
1
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@JimmyJames not quite. Using 'but' gives the reader an expectation that something unusual is coming, while using 'and' makes it a straight up description. It's essentially stylistic, but 'but' does make a difference.
– mcalex
Nov 16 '18 at 5:24
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
@mcalex I didn't say it was exactly the same in every way. Semantically, it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence. It's like 'too' versus 'also, style and feeling are different but not meaning. A counter example is that the 'but' in "all but one" cannot be replaced with 'and' without changing the meaning.
– JimmyJames
Nov 16 '18 at 15:19
add a comment |
It had the head of a man but (had) the body of a lion.
It is a kind of ellipsis, I think. Perhaps there is a narrower technical term for it. The verb had is understood to govern both objects, the head of a man and the body of a lion.
So that but there joins two clauses in one of which the verb is merely understood to be present.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
add a comment |
It had the head of a man but (had) the body of a lion.
It is a kind of ellipsis, I think. Perhaps there is a narrower technical term for it. The verb had is understood to govern both objects, the head of a man and the body of a lion.
So that but there joins two clauses in one of which the verb is merely understood to be present.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
add a comment |
It had the head of a man but (had) the body of a lion.
It is a kind of ellipsis, I think. Perhaps there is a narrower technical term for it. The verb had is understood to govern both objects, the head of a man and the body of a lion.
So that but there joins two clauses in one of which the verb is merely understood to be present.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
It had the head of a man but (had) the body of a lion.
It is a kind of ellipsis, I think. Perhaps there is a narrower technical term for it. The verb had is understood to govern both objects, the head of a man and the body of a lion.
So that but there joins two clauses in one of which the verb is merely understood to be present.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
edited Nov 15 '18 at 12:42
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:34
TᴚoɯɐuoTᴚoɯɐuo
114k788182
114k788182
add a comment |
add a comment |
Do you think you will better understand it if I restructure your quote like this:
Question: They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of what?
Answer: Of horses.
Question: But what did they have the front legs, wings and heads of?
Answer: Of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
Thus, technically speaking, but as used in your passage is a conjunction. It's making a contrast between different body parts that the creatures they're talking about have. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts which are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
add a comment |
Do you think you will better understand it if I restructure your quote like this:
Question: They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of what?
Answer: Of horses.
Question: But what did they have the front legs, wings and heads of?
Answer: Of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
Thus, technically speaking, but as used in your passage is a conjunction. It's making a contrast between different body parts that the creatures they're talking about have. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts which are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
add a comment |
Do you think you will better understand it if I restructure your quote like this:
Question: They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of what?
Answer: Of horses.
Question: But what did they have the front legs, wings and heads of?
Answer: Of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
Thus, technically speaking, but as used in your passage is a conjunction. It's making a contrast between different body parts that the creatures they're talking about have. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts which are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
Do you think you will better understand it if I restructure your quote like this:
Question: They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of what?
Answer: Of horses.
Question: But what did they have the front legs, wings and heads of?
Answer: Of what seemed to be giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes.
Thus, technically speaking, but as used in your passage is a conjunction. It's making a contrast between different body parts that the creatures they're talking about have. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts which are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
edited Nov 15 '18 at 13:09
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
answered Nov 15 '18 at 12:00
Michael RybkinMichael Rybkin
27.3k11110236
27.3k11110236
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
add a comment |
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
1
1
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
Oh, it's an interesting use! I think I get it. Are you saying: they had bodies (of horses), hind legs(of horses) and tails of horses, but had the front legs(of xxx giant eagles), wings(xxx giant eagles) and heads of xxx giant eagles?
– dan
Nov 15 '18 at 12:08
1
1
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
Exactly. The body parts that are listed at the beginning are those of horses, but the body parts that are listed later are like those that giant eagles have.
– Michael Rybkin
Nov 15 '18 at 12:11
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f185692%2fhelp-to-understand-the-use-of-but-in-this-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I wish to add this: I am a native speaker, but I had a bit of difficulty parsing this sentence at first reading. I would have preferred "They had the bodies, hind legs and tails of horses; but the front legs, wings and heads were those of giant eagles, with cruel, steel-coloured beaks and large, brilliantly orange eyes."
– trlkly
Nov 16 '18 at 1:26