They became witness to the event.
As far as I know, this usage is neither an idiom nor a cliché. Please let's not confuse this usage with "bear witness."
1- What part of speech is "witness" as used in this sentence?
2- What's the meaning of "witness" as used above? That is in comparison to its meaning in "They became witnesses to the event."
3- Do you have any references to support your disambiguation?
Thanks a bunch!
There is a great significance to this idea of 'Bearing Witness'.
This is very much a Christian idea. Hence the name of religous groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses.
To me
<<They became witness to the event.>>
is about being a witness. That is - seeing something!
Other than that, I think your question is very technical and not particularly meaningful.
What do you want to know? Is the word 'witness' being used as a verb or a noun? Is that really helpful?
The word 'Witness' has a legal meaning of course.
To be a Witness. That means that you are prepared to testify in Court what you saw.
Like a lot of words, the more you explore them, the more meaningless they become.
'Wit' - 'ness'.
Someone who has their 'wits' about them.
'Wit' - 'less'.
Someone who does not have their 'wits's about them.
A witness is someone who has seen something, and also the act of seeing.
"to witness" verb
"to be a witness" noun
Hi Robin Michael,
Maybe my question wasn't clear enough.
They became witness to the event.
If "witness" is a countable noun, why is it used in the singular form? You don't say, "They became teacher."
If it's used as an idiom or cliché, then the whole matter is settled. But as I stated in my original post, I haven't encountered any authoritative work that refers to this usage as such.
If you were to use "witness" as countable noun, you would say, "They became witnesses (plural) to the event."
I thank you for "Like a lot of words, the more you explore them, the more meaningless they become." I, however, disagree with that, but sincerely thank you for taking the time to attempt to answer my question.
I think it's an adjective.
Dear Baffled
Some expressions such as 'countable noun' are used by Learners of English as a Second Language, and they do not really have any currency amongst Native Speakers.
1. <<"They became witnesses to the event." >>
Refers to more than one person.
2. <<"They became witness to the event">>
Yes, I can see where the confusion arises, particularly as one of the sentences that you are comparing is in the title of the Post, and not in the Content.
What I would say, is that is often the case, a slightly different choice of words, or a change in word order in English, implies a slightly different emphasis or meaning.
The two sentences mean essentially the same thing. However, in the first sentence there is an implication that the people who witnessed the event are prepared to act as witnesses.
Whereas in the second sentence, it is only saying that they 'witnessed the event' not that they are prepared to act as witnesses.
In English class this process of analysis and dissection is sometimes called 'unpacking', as in 'unpacking the meaning', rather in the way that you unzip, a zipped computer file.
Another expression would be: 'Spelling out the meaning'.
People who witness (verb) an event, are not always prepared to become witnesses (noun).
Perhaps it would be better to say:
3. "They witnessed the event."
The meaning becomes clear from the context, (the surrounding sentences etc).
Sorry I'm so late to the game.
In general I agree with Robin Michael's comments. I would add that this particular formulation is often used to imply or indicate that either the event was in some way out of the ordinary or that it had an out of the ordinary effect on the witnesses, or both.