If someone used another one to achieve a personal interest, then the other person may describe herself/himself by the suitable noun (a non-human thing) which s/he has been used as it.

For example, if two friends went on a trip, but it appeared later that one of them has invited the other one to go with him for getting directions to their destination since the first one doesn't know the road while the other one knows it, so the friend who has been used may say to the one who used him:

— So, I was only a map for you.

Other possible situations where the following may apply:

— So, I was only a/an [experience/adventure/wallet/...] for you.

I came across a similar sentence which was written without an article, it was:

— I'm not property.

Is it normal in English to describe oneself by a non-human thing using solely the verb "be"? And, does it take articles or not?

I have tried writing similar sentences and general structures on Google Search but couldn't found anything alike.

  • 1
    See the answers here for when the article is omissible in such constructions. Property, however, can be used as an uncountable noun, so you can't really conclude anything from that example. – user3395 May 23 '19 at 11:44

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "BE", but yes it in very common to describe a human as an object. It is usually used as a description where the properties of said object fit the description you would like to use.

The third example you've given is slightly different. As opposed to saying I'm not a house, property here is defined as "belonging to".

I do not belong to you - I'm not your property.

  • 1
    Be, as in "the verb be" (am, is, was, etc.). I think they're asking whether you can say I was a map to you, as opposed to You used me as a map or such. – user3395 May 23 '19 at 11:47
  • 2
    Ah I see, I assumed it was an acronym! I believe it would work in any of these contexts. I am a map to you, I was a map to you, She is a map to me... – Gamora May 23 '19 at 11:52
  • 1
    I do not belong for you implies something else entirely I think. Sounds much more like a philosophical quote. In my understanding, it's more like I an not in this {group} specifically to please you. – Gamora May 23 '19 at 13:21
  • 1
    I think it's something to do with the tense of the sentence, I am only a map for you would mean that I guide you and only you. – Gamora May 23 '19 at 13:22
  • 1
    Nothing but a map to you would be: I am only a map to you, as opposed to I am a map to you only. It's dependent on which word the only is describing. – Gamora May 23 '19 at 13:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.