Do we say "a man of many brains" or "a man of

<I looked at those "more brain than" results on google and it looks like most of them are referring to physical brain size, and not being used idiomatically. >

And the ones that do not?

For one, again, my "circle of experience" is not the *only* thing I'm taking into account here. For two, there's also statistics to consider. Statistically, I obviously cannot be the only guy in America who thinks that both expressions sound odd. Indeed, I'm not even the only person in the thread who thinks they sound odd. Moreover, it's not as if my circle of experience is irrelevant. If you have a choice between a phrase that fits well for only some circles of experience and one that fits well for all of them, all else being equal, which would be a better choice? Why take a risk with "a man of much brain" or "a man of much brains" when something like "a genius" will do?

Let's also not forget the context in which the original poster asked this question. The subtleties of such expressions are probably not what the poster is concerned with at this point. I don't necessarily need a broad "circle of experience" to know that this expression is not as "safe" as many alternatives. I may only be one speaker, and I may not be the most well-read speaker there is, but give a guy a little credit, will ya? ;)

- Kef

<< And the ones that do not? >>

We're not doubting that the usage exists, we're doubting that it's common, which I think google so far corroborates.

<If you have a choice between a phrase that fits well for only some circles of experience and one that fits well for all of them, all else being equal, which would be a better choice?>

If the people are well-read, either form should be OK.

I get the feeling Americans always want to reduce possibilities in language use. "He is a man of much brain" is literary, formal and perfectly clear to those who know how to use the form. Alternatives such as ""He has a lot of brains" are fine in less formal/literary registers. Not the difference in register/formality between "much" and "a lot of".

<We're not doubting that the usage exists, we're doubting that it's common, which I think google so far corroborates. >

You doubted that it is idiomatic English, but refuse to define your use of the term "idiomatic English".

Typo correction:

Note the difference in register/formality between "much" and "a lot of".

<I don't necessarily need a broad "circle of experience" to know that this expression is not as "safe" as many alternatives. >

How are you using "safe" there?

Americans never say "much brain". Instead, we say "much brains", and that is why "much brain" doesn't sound right to us, not because we try to limit language usage. For example, another (colloquial) expression often used in America is "It doesn't take much brains (to figure that out; to graduate high school; to get a Liberal Arts degree; etc.)." However, as noted, in America, the phrase "much brains" is not considered formal English at all and wouldn't be used in very formal writing. We would use "intelligence" in that case.

<Americans never say "much brain". >

So it's OK in AmEng to use "much" with a plural form, is it?

"Brains" is sometimes used as a singular mass noun in American English, as well as a plural countable noun.

<< If the people are well-read, either form should be OK. >>

That's a very big assumption. ;)

I was going to say "That's a very big assumption in today's world", but my hunch is that, on the whole, people a hundred years ago probably weren't that well-read either. Surely reading was more common than it is today, since there was no radio, television, or cinema, but it's one thing to read more often than the average American (or Brit, or anybody) and another to actually be well-read.

Also, let's not forget that you have to know your audience. If you were writing a literary novel, fine, go ahead and use it. But perhaps it wouldn't be the best expression to use in an ordinary conversation with your ordinary friends.

<< I get the feeling Americans always want to reduce possibilities in language use. "He is a man of much brain" is literary, formal and perfectly clear to those who know how to use the form. >>

Well, I can't help it if I never encountered it before. It's hardly an essential expression, and there are still literary, formal, and clear ways of expressing essentially the same thought. Perhaps none that are as concise, but perhaps it would be better to rephrase anyway. Why not show us rather than tell us that he's smart? For example, list a particular quality that shows his intelligence, or mention an obviously brilliant thing that he did? Not only would that avoid the problem, it would make much more of an impression on the reader.

I'm also not a very literary reader... I read the works of people like Douglas Adams, not Charles Dickens. Right now I'm reading the book "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!", which is certainly no classic novel -- neither a classic nor a novel at all, in fact -- but it's still a great and intellectually engaging book.

Also, again I say it's important to remember the context of the original post. A foreign speaker doesn't *want* to have a million options at his disposal until he or she is ready. Sure, all foreign speakers would like to have the maximum amount of expression at their fingertips -- being a language learner myself, I know the temptation too well -- but handling that situation is like handling everything else in learning a language: one step at a time; you must learn to walk before you can run; etc. If somebody who is clearly a foreign speaker uses the phrase "of much brain" in a conversation with me, it won't sound educated, it will sound "off". Before taking advantage of subtleties, they must first be understood.

<< You doubted that it is idiomatic English, but refuse to define your use of the term "idiomatic English". >>

When you said "It is idiomatic English", I thought you meant "it is an idiom" -- that is, it's a particular expression, rather than a pattern. I am aware that "idiomatic English" can refer to patterns rather than individual phrases, but I didn't think of a pattern because, again, I didn't think "of much brain" fit the same pattern as "of much intelligence". I said the word "idiomatic" one time in this entire thread... my argument certainly doesn't hinge on its definition! So let's not get caught up in terminology (again). :)

Responding to Pos:

<< How are you using "safe" there? >>

When I speak of a "safe" expression, I mean one that is sure not to create any wrong impressions. For instance, if I use "of much brain" in a conversation and the listener never heard this expression, they will probably assume I made an error. Of course, if I obviously appeared to be a non-native speaker, then errors would be expected, and then it's even more likely to be perceived as an error.

<< So it's OK in AmEng to use "much" with a plural form, is it? >>

I can't speak for Guest, but as I said earlier in the thread, I didn't like "much brains" either, because "brains" is plural in form. So I don't like either "much brain" or "much brains" and favor rewording. In fact, it would not surprise me if the colloquial expression "a lot of brains" came about because neither "much brain" nor "much brains" sounded right to the speaker. We can only speculate, of course... it's difficult enough to know when and where such phrases appeared, let alone why.

- Kef

<Also, let's not forget that you have to know your audience. If you were writing a literary novel, fine, go ahead and use it. But perhaps it wouldn't be the best expression to use in an ordinary conversation with your ordinary friends. >

And nobody said it would. You began by denying the value of the expression outright. That's were you went wrong. Now you're busy backpedalling.

<<Why not show us rather than tell us that he's smart? For example, list a particular quality that shows his intelligence, or mention an obviously brilliant thing that he did? Not only would that avoid the problem, it would make much more of an impression on the reader.>>


The topic question was about grammar, not style.

<A foreign speaker doesn't *want* to have a million options at his disposal until he or she is ready.>

This foreign speaker would like to be able to use various registers well. You want to limit us to basic, literal expession. Don't forget that many of us have similar expressions to "much brain" in our own languages. We have formal and informal use. Many of us are skilled in using a mix of registers in our own language, so why do you want to reduce us to one or two base terms? I get tired of commentators such as you who treat nonnative speakers as children.

<When you said "It is idiomatic English", I thought you meant "it is an idiom" -- that is, it's a particular expression, rather than a pattern. >

So, even in the definition of "an idiom", you don't think "much brain" is idiomatic?