Page 34 of 44 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 680 of 866

Thread: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

  1. #661
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Native language
    English - England
    Posts
    24,395

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by lucas-sp View Post
    ..."If you think I'm going to let you leave without one of my world-famous chocolate chip brownies, then you've got another thing/k coming!" No threat there.
    You have clearly never tasted those so-called "chocolate brownies"...

    The more I hear sentences where "you've got another think/g coming!" the more I am convinced that it is, "then you should have second thoughts." but "another think" is used for the effect.

    Despite the fact that "another thing coming" can appear outside the phrase, in Ngram, BE shows it as far less popular.

    The same is true of AE.

    In normal comparisons, were two phrases so compared. such figures would point clearly to one being the accepted version and the other the bastard son.

    I suggest a look at the comparison of "I could not care less" and "I could care less" for a similar disparity.
    "There are no rules in English, only guidance. Some guidance looks like a rule; it probably isn't."

  2. #662
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    England
    Native language
    English - England
    Posts
    14,285

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulQ View Post
    ...In normal comparisons, were two phrases so compared. such figures would point clearly to one being the accepted version and the other the bastard son...
    With all the goodwill of a fellow thinkist, I believe that this aspect of the debate has already been exhausted.
    I agree wholeheartedly that the dictionaries and the statistics support us but I have to admit that the thingist version has its own peculiar logic and so is viable regardless of its parentage.
    If you think that, you have another think coming!

  3. #663
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Native language
    American English
    Age
    60
    Posts
    49

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by Biffo View Post
    ... the thingist version ... is viable ...

    Perhaps.

    Or [guffaw] you may have another think coming!

  4. #664
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Native language
    English -- U.S.
    Posts
    8

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by JulianStuart View Post
    See my post 648 above. It's quite possible that you have only heard the thing version because that's what you thought they said, while tsome of them may have actually said think! Wiktionary is consistent with (may be based on) the data extracted from Google books (via Ngram viewer) showing it as much more common in print than the thing version.
    I thought about that, and was going to say something to that effect, but on second thought I came to the conclusion that it's unlikely given the phonetics:

    If you say "…thing coming," you have a voiced [ŋ] followed by an unvoiced [k]. Since they're both velar, the first consonant flows smoothly into the second. But if you say "think coming" you have phonemically two velar [k]'s back-to-back, which (at least in my mouth) becomes phonetically a glottal stop and then a [k]. I don't think a native speaker would normally mistake one of these combinations for the other, as the glottal stop is quite distinct. If one were to actually enunciate both [k]'s, then there would be an even more noticeable "space" between the two consonants as the mouth reset its shape from the [I] in "thing/think" to the [ə] in "coming."

    But hey, if you're on a noisy train, in a nightclub, etc., maybe it's possible? Food for thought...

  5. #665
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Native language
    English - England
    Posts
    24,395

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    You have been listening to siren voices. They will have you saying "thing" before the week is out.

    Where do you stand on "Second thoughts" -> "another think"?
    "There are no rules in English, only guidance. Some guidance looks like a rule; it probably isn't."

  6. #666
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    England
    Native language
    English - England
    Posts
    14,285

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulQ View Post
    You have been listening to siren voices. They will have you saying "thing" before the week is out.

    Where do you stand on "Second thoughts" -> "another think"?
    Who are you addressing PaulQ?

    I'm a die-hard, dyed-in-the wool thinkist. My take is the same as yours except I call it a rethink.
    If you think that, you have another think coming!

  7. #667
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    England
    Native language
    English - England
    Posts
    14,285

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by jasmithers View Post
    I thought about that, and was going to say something to that effect, but on second thought I came to the conclusion that it's unlikely given the phonetics:

    If you say "…thing coming," you have a voiced [ŋ] followed by an unvoiced [k]. Since they're both velar, the first consonant flows smoothly into the second. But if you say "think coming" you have phonemically two velar [k]'s back-to-back, which (at least in my mouth) becomes phonetically a glottal stop and then a [k]. I don't think a native speaker would normally mistake one of these combinations for the other, as the glottal stop is quite distinct. If one were to actually enunciate both [k]'s, then there would be an even more noticeable "space" between the two consonants as the mouth reset its shape from the [I] in "thing/think" to the [ə] in "coming."

    But hey, if you're on a noisy train, in a nightclub, etc., maybe it's possible? Food for thought...
    You're going to hate me but this has already been explored across several posts including for example #472
    Sorry to be such a drag. I'm simply trying to prevent endless repetition.

    Tip: You can see if a subject has been covered before by searching the thread for a particular keyword.
    Last edited by Biffo; 10th February 2013 at 3:15 AM.
    If you think that, you have another think coming!

  8. #668
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Native language
    American English
    Age
    60
    Posts
    49

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulQ View Post
    As an aside, and being as this thread is so long, it would be interesting to have a poll - even more interesting would be to combine the place where those voting spent the majority of their childhood and their choice of thing/k.
    Even more interesting would be to combine a recounting of one's first encounter with the phrase.

    No, wait, that would work only for people with exceptional memories.

  9. #669
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sonoma County CA
    Native language
    English (UK then US)
    Age
    64
    Posts
    12,363

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by jasmithers View Post
    I thought about that, and was going to say something to that effect, but on second thought I came to the conclusion that it's unlikely given the phonetics:

    If you say "…thing coming," you have a voiced [ŋ] followed by an unvoiced [k]. Since they're both velar, the first consonant flows smoothly into the second. But if you say "think coming" you have phonemically two velar [k]'s back-to-back, which (at least in my mouth) becomes phonetically a glottal stop and then a [k]. I don't think a native speaker would normally mistake one of these combinations for the other, as the glottal stop is quite distinct. If one were to actually enunciate both [k]'s, then there would be an even more noticeable "space" between the two consonants as the mouth reset its shape from the [I] in "thing/think" to the [ə] in "coming."

    But hey, if you're on a noisy train, in a nightclub, etc., maybe it's possible? Food for thought...
    I won't try to find the earlier discussion (of the technical aspects of the sounds) in the thread*, just to say that there are variations in the continuum between the extremes you characterize. If someone says the expression as a series of separate words, it's clear there will be no mixup. However, when people speak quickly and decrease the extent of voicing, for example, and some just don't enunciate very clearly anyway - particularly eschewing clear glottal stops, there is plenty of room for mishearing. Then add the noisy environments and viola ()


    * Edit: Biffo's post above mine did just that #472



    A kind soul pointed out my typo (viola) and I responded, "If you thought that was accidental, you have another string coming "
    Last edited by JulianStuart; 10th February 2013 at 4:52 AM.
    Your meaning is not what you think it is, it is what your listener thinks it is

  10. #670
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    9,464

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by mplsray View Post
    Corruption, although once used in linguistics, always was a loaded word. (The link is to the Wikipedia article "Corruption (linguistics).") Parasitism carries negative connotations as well. Neither term aids the current discussion.
    These terms are not pejorative in their correct technical use, nor are they out of date.
    I shall try to show their value in this discussion by developing my post 644.

    First, here are examples of 'corruption' in the technical sense.

    The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Folktales and Fairy Tales
    Donald Haase 2007
    He thought such borrowings result from corruption due to imperfect oral transmission.

    Animal Imagery and Oral Discourse in Havelok's First Fight
    Scott Kleinman, Viator 35 (2004):
    because of unpolished writing or the corruption of an earlier story through oral transmission

    The fact that a word or phrase may become altered as a result of oral transmission has long been recognised as a standard element in criticism and linguistics. The closeness (not identity) of sound between 'think' and 'thing' is just the sort of factor which gives rise to corruption, that is, alteration, of an expression. That simple fact is almost too obvious to mention.

    Also obvious, but more interesting, is that in the combination 'think coming' there is a tendency in conversation for one of the two 'k' sounds to disappear, either because it is not clearly articulated by the speaker or because it is not perceived by the listener. Less obvious, but more interesting still, is the fact that the converse of this is not true. In other words, there is no comparable tendency (that is, from speech processes as such) for a second 'k' sound to be inserted between the words 'thing coming', either by the speaker or by the listener.

    Most interesting, however, is the corollary of this: namely, that there is a natural tendency for 'think coming' to become corrupted (in this technical sense) into 'thing coming' in the course of oral transmission (and especially from parents to children): but no tendency for the reverse to happen. 'Thing coming' will not tend as a result of mere speech processes to be corrupted into 'think coming'. This particular example of natural corruption in transmission works only one way.

    Regardless of how fast or slow the process may be, it goes one way only. Therefore we should expect, purely as a result of natural speech processes, a slow change from 'think coming' towards 'thing coming'. However, by the same token, we cannot expect such a change the other way. It follows from this that if 'thing coming' were the original form, there would be no tendency for it to change into 'think coming'.

    If the expression starts as 'think coming', the time will come, by natural processes, when the two forms both exist side by side. Whereas if it starts as 'thing coming', that will remain the only version. Consequently, the fact that the two forms now exist together goes to show that 'think coming' is the original version. This in turn is confirmed by the ngrams which show that 'think coming' was for decades the greatly predominant form and that 'thing coming' has risen in the following generations.

    'Think coming' was prevalent first.
    Last edited by wandle; 10th February 2013 at 6:17 AM.

  11. #671
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    9,464

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    As regards 'parasitic', I mean that in a broader sense than the strict linguistic one.
    In fact, I am tempted to call it the philosophical sense, exemplified in these extracts:

    Michael Dummett: Contributions to Philosophy
    edited by B.M. Taylor
    I am myself strongly inclined to say, first, that no one can be said to mean something by an utterance unless he understands it, and, secondly, that it is only in a parasitic, derivative or attenuated sense that an utterance may be said to mean something that the speaker does not mean by it.

    Handout by Arif Ahmed
    (Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at Cambridge since 2011)
    Thus ‘calculating in the head’: here we are using ‘calculating’ in a secondary or parasitic sense. Only if you know what calculation on paper is can you grasp the notion of ‘calculating in the head’ ...

    In both these examples, an expression is called 'parasitic' because it depends for its meaning upon another expression. That is just the case with 'thing coming'. It is parasitic, in this sense, upon 'think coming' because it depends for its meaning on the pre-established meaning of the form which was prevalent first. The examples collected by lucas-sp in post 638 as well as those I presented in an earlier post go to show that 'thing coming' is regularly used in similar contexts and with similar effective meaning to 'think coming'.

    However, as a great many posts have pointed out, there is no necessary reason, from the sense of the words themselves, why 'thing coming' should mean the same as 'think coming'. The phrase could mean a great many other things, if the words are taken on their own. However, in context, in actual practice, they regularly show the same meaning as 'think coming'. Why should that be?

    The answer, I submit, is that while the gradual change described above was taking place (the corruption by natural speech processes of 'think coming' into 'thing coming'), the expression was still being used in the typical contexts belonging to 'think coming'. The older generation understood it as 'think coming' and used it accordingly. Consequently the younger generation, although in many cases they perceived it as 'thing coming', nevertheless learned to use it in contexts appropriate to 'think coming'.

    Result: increasing numbers of people who consciously believe the expression is 'thing coming' but unconsciously use it as if it were 'think coming'.
    Last edited by wandle; 10th February 2013 at 6:17 AM.

  12. #672
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
    Native language
    English, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    4,575

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    If we're talking philosophy, then I would opt for the metaphor of evolution through natural selection. The thing version has proven more fit in some environments than the think version, although the think version remains fit for some environments and has thus not gone extinct. Two other examples of the same sort of thing are the continued existence of the idioms "taking the piss" alongside "taking the mick(ey)" in British English and the idioms "I couldn't care less" alongside "I could care less" in American English.

    Biological parasites have, of course, evolved. The difference between biological parasitism and what you are suggesting is the relationship between the thing and think versions of the expression in question is that the thing version could easily survive if the original version—and I agree that the think version was likely to be the original version—went extinct, whereas a biological parasite dies when its host dies.

    There's also the matter of the connotations of parasitism being entirely negative, which is another reason that it, and the expression corruption, are best avoided in linguistic discussions. (They contrast with a term such as dialect, which even though it has mostly negative connotation to the general public, has proven valuable in linguistics in determining how to best think about language.)

  13. #673
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Milano, Italia
    Native language
    UK, English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    14,125

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by mplsray View Post
    The thing version has proven more fit in some environments than the think version, although the think version remains fit for some environments and has thus not gone extinct.
    You could equally well say, "The think version has proven more fit in some environments than the thing version, although the thing version remains fit for some environments and has thus not gone extinct.
    It all depends on your personal experience; like many others I had never come across the thing version, just as many thingists had never heard the think version.
    I'm now going to unsubscibe from this thread! In spite of the displays of tolerance by both sides I have a sneaking feeling that everyone is hoping to find evidence that will finally prove their version is the original, "correct" one! It's what I hoped too, but if it were possible it would already have happened and we wouldn't be at post #673! Unsubscribing is my personal choice and I wish everyone else happy debating!

  14. #674
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    41

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by Forero View Post
    I suspect number 3, and probably some of the others too, was "corrected" by an editor.Did you miss number 3 too?
    Sorry for the delay in replying, Forero, and most interestingly, yes, I just checked my answers and 3 was the one I missed.

  15. #675
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    41

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by wandle View Post
    The examples in post 638 do indeed show that 'thing' is used in the same sort of contexts as 'think' and with the same effective meaning. However, this certainly does not mean that there is no difference between 'thing' and 'think'.
    Surely commmon sense would indicate that if that is the conclusion, there must be a flaw in the reasoning.

    The proper conclusion from the fact that 'thing' is used in this way is, as pointed out earlier in the thread with similar examples, that the 'thing' version is parasitic upon and derived from the 'think' version. It simply gives us more evidence that 'thing' is a corruption of 'think' (that is, a version accidentally changed in the course of oral transmission).
    Well, I see what you mean but are you sure it being a 'corruption' adequately explains it? If the horrible 'Everythink is going wrong' is a corruption, then clearly 'You've got another thing coming' isn't. Surely it has obtained currency because it also makes sense?

  16. #676
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    41

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by mplsray View Post
    Corruption, although once used in linguistics, always was a loaded word. (The link is to the Wikipedia article "Corruption (linguistics).") Parasitism carries negative connotations as well. Neither term aids the current discussion.

    It seems to me that if there were any relevant differences between thing and think in the expression in question, people who usually use one expression would have occasion to use the other, and vice-versa. Since this does not happen, there is no relevant difference.

    The differences that have been recognized in this thread only occur when people go out of their way to analyze the expression, not when they are actually using it in everyday speech. To the function of the expression, these differences are irrelevant.
    It's a fair point about the analysing but I don't know, if we are talking about common usage, then it surely goes without saying that a person has a choice, as it were, as to which of the two they use, even if it is subconscious, which might, in a way, make it even more of a valid consideration. Maybe it would be more fruitful to think of the desired effect of the communication on the person(s) addressed?

    Imagine I'm talking to a student at school where I used to teach, say:

    'If you think I'm going to accept this, you've got another thing coming.'

    'If you think I'm going to accept this, you've got another think coming.'

    They cannot be identical because if they were, only one of them would exist. In my above utterance, I would have to be thinking of my knowledge of the student and the circumstances as well, that would affect my choice. And why did I myself put 'thing' first and 'think' second? Was I moving up or moving down?

  17. #677
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    9,464

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by mplsray View Post
    "I couldn't care less" alongside "I could care less"
    It may well be that 'I could care less' is a corruption (accidental alteration from the original form) of 'I couldn't care less' due to failed or unclear articulation of the third syllable. I would also expect a similar pattern of use as with 'thing coming': the changed form rising in frequency sometime after the original. No comparable mispronunciation can be shown in the case of 'taking the mickey', though.

    'Parasitic' in this usage means 'dependent for its meaning upon another expression'. This is a language point. It is not about biological parasitism. The key to it is that the specific meaning illustrated in the examples in post 638 and my own earlier post could not be deduced from the vague expression 'thing coming' were it not for the fact that it is used in contexts appropriate to the pre-established form 'think coming'.

    There is no benefit and no point in bringing other meanings of the above terms into play.

  18. #678
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    41

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by wandle View Post
    These terms are not pejorative in their correct technical use, nor are they out of date.
    I shall try to show their value in this discussion by developing my post 644.

    First, here are examples of 'corruption' in the technical sense.

    The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Folktales and Fairy Tales
    Donald Haase 2007
    He thought such borrowings result from corruption due to imperfect oral transmission.

    Animal Imagery and Oral Discourse in Havelok's First Fight
    Scott Kleinman, Viator 35 (2004):
    because of unpolished writing or the corruption of an earlier story through oral transmission

    The fact that a word or phrase may become altered as a result of oral transmission has long been recognised as a standard element in criticism and linguistics. The closeness (not identity) of sound between 'think' and 'thing' is just the sort of factor which gives rise to corruption, that is, alteration, of an expression. That simple fact is almost too obvious to mention.

    Also obvious, but more interesting, is that in the combination 'think coming' there is a tendency in conversation for one of the two 'k' sounds to disappear, either because it is not clearly articulated by the speaker or because it is not perceived by the listener. Less obvious, but more interesting still, is the fact that the converse of this is not true. In other words, there is no comparable tendency (that is, from speech processes as such) for a second 'k' sound to be inserted between the words 'thing coming', either by the speaker or by the listener.

    Most interesting, however, is the corollary of this: namely, that there is a natural tendency for 'think coming' to become corrupted (in this technical sense) into 'thing coming' in the course of oral transmission (and especially from parents to children): but no tendency for the reverse to happen. 'Thing coming' will not tend as a result of mere speech processes to be corrupted into 'think coming'. This particular example of natural corruption in transmission works only one way.

    Regardless of how fast or slow the process may be, it goes one way only. Therefore we should expect, purely as a result of natural speech processes, a slow change from 'think coming' towards 'thing coming'. However, by the same token, we cannot expect such a change the other way. It follows from this that if 'thing coming' were the original form, there would be no tendency for it to change into 'think coming'.

    If the expression starts as 'think coming', the time will come, by natural processes, when the two forms both exist side by side. Whereas if it starts as 'thing coming', that will remain the only version. Consequently, the fact that the two forms now exist together goes to show that 'think coming' is the original version. This in turn is confirmed by the ngrams which show that 'think coming' was for decades the greatly predominant form and that 'thing coming' has risen in the following generations.

    'Think coming' was prevalent first.
    That is, indeed, very interesting, but it does rest upon the assumption that it was sound and pronunciation that led to the corruption, if corruption it is. Why cannot it be just as valid to argue that it was sense and meaning and intent that led to the use of both, and that the development of, 'You've got another think coming', came after 'You've got another thing coming', especially since 'think' is not a noun and 'thing' is?

  19. #679
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Native language
    English - British
    Posts
    9,464

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cliffyboy View Post
    Surely it has obtained currency because it also makes sense?
    As explained in post 671, 'thing coming' depends for its meaning upon the pre-established form 'think coming'.

  20. #680
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
    Native language
    English, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    4,575

    Re: You've got another 'thing' / 'think' coming?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cliffyboy View Post
    It's a fair point about the analysing but I don't know, if we are talking about common usage, then it surely goes without saying that a person has a choice, as it were, as to which of the two they use, even if it is subconscious, which might, in a way, make it even more of a valid consideration. Maybe it would be more fruitful to think of the desired effect of the communication on the person(s) addressed?

    Imagine I'm talking to a student at school where I used to teach, say:

    'If you think I'm going to accept this, you've got another thing coming.'

    'If you think I'm going to accept this, you've got another think coming.'

    They cannot be identical because if they were, only one of them would exist. In my above utterance, I would have to be thinking of my knowledge of the student and the circumstances as well, that would affect my choice. And why did I myself put 'thing' first and 'think' second? Was I moving up or moving down?
    The average person has no choice in the matter, since he will use the version he first learned and be utterly unaware of the other version. It's not like the "taking the piss"/"taking the mick(ey)" distinction I mentioned in an earlier post where a speaker (in this case, of British English) learns two versions of an expression which are to be used in different situations.

Page 34 of 44 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •