Editor for this issue: <>
Dana Scott is characteristically ingenious in showing how the use of "just in case" to mean "iff" could have been derived by a kind of ellipsis from something like "just in this case." He demonstrates, not for the first time, how much more intellectually satisfying linguistics would be if it were a purely deductive science. The crassly empirical OED suggests another, more pedestrian origin for the phrase. It gives a sense (from c1400) for "in case" to mean simply "in the event or contingency that, if it should prove or happen that, if" with no implication of provision against an untoward outome, as in "In case one sudden chance... had not interrupted me." It is not clear when this sense became obsolete, but the OED does give two 19th-century citations for it, and it's fair to assume that Bradley or Russell would have regarded "just in case" as an unremarkable if perhaps slightly literary way of saying "just if" or "just in the event that."Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I first ran into 'just in case' in the 'iff' sense in the late sixties,
in linguistic literature -- my recollection is that I first encountered
it in this sense in a paper by Jerry Fodor. I also remember being initially
slightly puzzled by it but in the context it became evident what it meant
and I have since incorporated it into my own usage when I write for publi-
cation.
I will confess to some metaperplexity here, not over the fact that people
encountering the usage for the first time found it at odds with their nor-
mal understanding of the phrase but by what I take to be surprise that
'just in case' COULD have 'iff' as one if its meanings. Since 'in case'
is a synonym of 'if' in at least some contexts ('In case of rain I'll have
an umbrella with me') and since 'just' in one of its senses means 'only'
('I'm just a simple country lawyer') why is it so surprising that 'just
in case' can mean 'if and only if'? Or am I reading more into some of the
comments than is warranted?
Michael Kac
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
A codicil to an earlier posting re 'just in case' for 'iff'. In taking *just* in its 'only' sense, I do not in fact make a full case for *just in case* being naturally interpretable as *if and only if*. It would make more sense to allude to yet another sense of *just* on which it means *exactly* (as in 'The temperature is just right'). Between my earlier posting and this one, I read Dana Scott's analysis, which prompted me to realize that I was justifying an interpretation of *just in case* on which it shold mean *only if*. It may be coincidence that it doesn't. A sidelight: I almost zapped a Linguist volume devoted to this question be- cause the phrase wasn't in quotes. I concluded that it was concerned with contingency plans of some kind. Let's hear it for the use-mention distinction! Michael KacMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In the Longman Guide to English Usage, s.v. case, Sidney Greenbaum et al. write that in case can mean if in American English, giving as both American and British English We'd better insure the house in case it burns downs and as purely American We'll get the insurance money in case the house burns down. Similar information is to be found in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary Englihsh, s.v. case. Is this right? No American non-linguist that I have consulted in a straw poll here in Amsterdam recognizes the latter usage, and to judge by the reactions on the net so far, linguists appear to regard the usage as restricted to the register of logic, mathematics, formal linguistics, etc. I wonder if the American scientific-register usage has a Germanic origin. In German Im Falle, dass (lit. In-the case that) and Im Falle + genitive can, as far as I know, have a neutral conditional sense, whereas the contingency sense of English In case it rains is usually Fuer den Fall, dass (for the case that). Similar remarks apply to Dutch, where we find in het geval dat, in het geval van and in geval van with a conditional sense, the contingency sense being expressed as voor het geval dat. Interestingly, a mistake commonly made by Dutch academics writing English is to use in case of where the sense is a neutral conditional. In a medical text, for example, a medical researcher undergoing training in writing English for publication wrote 'In case of an adverse reaction, act as follows' to mean 'If an adverse reaction occurs, act as follows'. S/he did not intend the meaning 'To avoid an adverse reaction, act as follows'. Lachlan Mackenzie, Free University, Amsterdam, NetherlandsMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Geoffrey Russom's speculation that the logicians' use of "just in case" may derive from British English isn't right, I don't think. As a British English speaker, logicians' "just in case" sounds wrong to me in exactly the way being reported on by Russom, Partee, et al. In fact, the first time I came across this usage, I thought it must be American! So, who can we blame it on now? --- John ColemanMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I'm responding to Rus Russom's contribution, and more genrally, but belatedly to the in/on discussion. I am a native English speaker (as opposed to a native American speaker) and the 'just in case' to mean 'if and only if' is not, as far as I am concerned English. I have always had problems with this American usage - it interrupts my reading of anything containing it (as does 'plow' which for me rhymes with 'blow' not 'now', and unavoidably so - but that is another story). The reading which Rus offers - the taking of an umbrella just in case it rains - is English. In my view, if I encounter 'on X's view' in some text or other (which I don't recall having done - but lets assume I have poor memory) then I automatically assume that the person is illiterate/non-English. I would certainly correct it in anything for which I was given editorial responsibility. Likewise, an irritating error is creeping into English - 'on the weekend' when people mean 'at the weekend'. That's my formal response. Informally I can say it much more rudely - but I notice that the Linguist is very polite - so Ileave it to your imaginations. But there is a further interesting question. Does the meaning of these words migrate in the following sense? A given set of meanings maps onto some prepositions, and then 'creative' use of language over a period shifts the meanings to a different mapping (but doesn't change the overall semantic package). So, in the current debate, can we expect to find some other use developing for 'in'? Or, is everything drifting to a single general purpose preposition? Or, is there some profound change in the semantics whereby metaphors are leaking or whatever (after all, I wouldn't object to someone taking a stand on this issue, and we have 'standpoint' and 'viewpoint') giving us the underlying notion that a view is something to stand on (rather than sit in?). Just a thought.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In reply to Dana Scott's contribution. No And then again, perhaps. The problem is that the derivation offered suggests that those concerned are totally unware that 'just in case' has a strong other reading with logical significance which confuses many readers (cf the weight of opinion expressed in Linguist). Just in case I am misunderstood, my suggestion that logician's are insensitive to language is intended to be humorous.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue