This is the sentence that I've been thinking:

I would have gone had they been ____

a) ignorant

b) ignorance

Notice that the writer (of the question) omitted the "if", so that he could revert they and had, means that the sentence is a conditional sentence.

So, between ignorant and ignorance which one is better? In this case I'm thinking about "I'd be happy", It has an identical structure with the question, is it correct if I choose b) since it's an adjective?

Sometimes, I'm confused with what I should put after "be". Like:

I want to be a doctor (a noun)

I want to be happy (an adjective)

What's the difference? How do i know? Hope you can make me understand.

  • 1
    'Ignorant' is the only one that makes sense. 'They' were, or were not, ignorant of something. You can't say 'They were ignorance' any more than you can say 'I want to be happiness.' – Kate Bunting May 16 at 7:14
  • This might help: ell.stackexchange.com/a/87989 – Man_From_India May 16 at 7:52
  • << I would have gone had they been ____ >> means << I would have gone if they had been ____ >. << ... if they had been ignorance / gangster / happiness >> ? Of course not. << ... if they had been ignorant / thuggish / happy >> ? Yes, adjectives work. << ... if they had been gangsters / happy people >> ? Yes, plural count-noun usages work. – Edwin Ashworth May 16 at 16:51

“They had been ignorance” would not make sense since ignorance is not an adjective. Ignorant can describe “them”, therefore it is the correct form.

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.