Editor for this issue: <>
The comment on "ways" struck a chord; I think there is a final "s" not generally accepted in the US on many spatial adverbs; I grew up saying "towards" only to be rudely corrected upon reaching graduate school. (There are no British in my family, and I lived all up and down the East coast, so I'm not sure where it came from.) L Morgan (Loyola in Md.)Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
A comment and a query in response to the postings on "not". Dale Savage cites a Zane Grey story from 1918 with the sarcastic observation "You an' Dad are great hunters, I don't think!" In a 1978 article on negation for the Stanford anthology "Universals of Human Language", I cited an instance of the same turn from a post-WWII British novel by Joyce Cary: "Girls are a lot of good, I don't think." These are clearly related to retro-NOT, as Dale points out, and specifically serve as counterexamples to the general requirement that negative parentheticals appear only in negative sentences in a position following the main clause negation to which they are in apposition: They are not, I (don't) think, going to be able to get here on time. They are, I (*don't) think, not going to be able to get here on time. Does anyone have any firsthand experience with these retro-parentheticals? Martin Wynne, also in 3.179, mentions the use of "much", which evidently has spread now at least in some parts of Britain to a generalized retro- cancellation following even affirmatives (he gives the constructed example - I'm going to get a job in the City. - Much!) If anyone has any actual citations of this use, I'd love receiving them. What I'm familiar with is the use of "not much" as a negative form of retro negation to cancel one's own or someone else's negative assertion. It's less dramatic than "NOT", more ironic than sarcastic (although please don't ask me to define the difference). If anyone recalls the pop song from a while back that goes something like I don't miss my arms around you No, not much. or has other reflections on the transition from "not much" to "much", I'd love hearing them. (LHORNMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueYALEVM.bitnet) --Larry Horn
The contribution from Dale Savage reminded me that my mother (born in London, grew up before World War II) uses this "I don't think" construction, as in: He'll bring it when he says he will, I don't think. I don't believe I often use it, but I have a feeling it's quite standard for people of her generation. There may be more than one variant, though: in my mother's variety, there is not much pitch movement in the three words in question, but there is some, on the last word, so the sentence above comes out like: He'll BRING it when he SAYs he will, I don't THINK. I think, though, that I've heard people say He'll BRING it when he SAYS he will, I DON'T think. Does anyone reading this use either of these, and what do they think?Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
> > 3) > Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 15:06:57 EST > From: Sarah Jones <SAAJONESMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueucs.indiana.edu> > Subject: the Popular Press discovers NOT > 3) > Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 15:06:57 EST > From: Sarah Jones <SAAJONES
ucs.indiana.edu> > Subject: the Popular Press discovers NOT > > Lately, it's seemed pretty easy to bash the popular press for > its treatment of linguistic/pseudolinguistic issues. The other > side of the coin appeared in this morning's paper--the Indianapolis > Star ran an article from the Orlando Sentinel, by Linda Shrieves... > a report of the varying theories of the origin of post affirmative > NOT. > > It's quite a nice article, surely with great appeal to the "mass > market" with its light tone and references to Wayne's World and > the 70's Steve Martin SNL skit in which he used NOT (the appearance > of which she refers to as "a linguist's archaeological find") > > In trying to track down somebody to comment on the phrase, the author, > getting nowhere with the various SNL folks, ends up with Pamela Munro > and none other than our own Larry Horn and references to our own > LINGUIST discussion. It was a very faithful treatment of the whole > matter, yet still very "readable". > > So, maybe there's hope for a "pop" linguistics that doesn't make us > cringe, after all. > > --Sarah Jones > saajones
ucs.indiana.edu > saajones
iubacs.bitnet > This has been something that I have been wondering about since it appeared in discussion, and it has occurred to me that an early user of the juxtaposed not might have been e.e. cummings pity this busy monster man unkind not .. of course this discussion is well dead, but I feel better for having sent this. philip -- ********************************************************************** --The most convincing evidence that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none has ever tried to contact us. Calvin ********************************************************************** pbernick
nmsu.edu Las Cruces, New Mexico
The rewards and perils of fame... Yes, as Sarah Jones notes, the popular press has discovered retro-NOT with a vengeance. The Orlando Sentinel piece by Linda Shrieves, appearing February 12, complete with a user's guide (i.e. a minigrammar of the construction), was picked off the wire service by the New Haven Register, yielding if nothing else a nice headline: YALE PROF. STUDIES 'NOT'? NO WAY. WAY!! --little did they know I work on negative polarity phenomena in my spare time. Anyway, these articles triggered various responses, including some totally irrelevant contributions (Jack Paar's "I kid you not", the expression "'fraid not") from the non-linguist readership. I also had a curious conversation from a reporter from the Bridgeport Post who wanted to send a photographer over to take my picture standing next to the "bulletin board" on which responses were posted--I had to explain that Linguist List is not the sort of bulletin board that makes for great photo opportunities. But I did get one remarkable citation from someone in Orange, Connecticut named John Wildanger. This is the opening of a 1955 short story mystery by Rex Stout, "Immune to Murder" (reprinted in Three for the Chair, Bantam, 1957). As the story opens, Nero Wolfe has been summoned by the State Department to join a fishing party in an Adirondacks lodge so that he might cook fresh trout for the Ambassador of (apparently) Greece, but has become immobilized by a putative attack of lumbago. I stood with my arms folded, glaring down at Nero Wolfe, who had his 278 pounds planted in a massive armchair... "A fine way to serve your country", I told him. "Not. In spite of a late start I get you here in time to be shown to your room and unpack and wash up for dinner, and now you tell me to go tell your host you want dinner in your room. Nothing doing. I decline." The speaker is of course Wolfe's factotum Archie Goodwin, who (as Louis Goldstein reminds me) hails from Chillicothe, Ohio, just down the pike from the Illinois headquarters of Wayne and Garth. --Larry HornMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue