Re: Think
(n.)
Posted by R. Berg on October 12, 2002 In Reply to: Re: Another think coming - the
plot thickens (thiggens?) posted by Word Camel on October 12, 2002
: : : : : : : : : : : Can anyone help solve an office argument?
: : : : : :
: : : : : Is the following phrase correct:
: : : : : : : : : : : If you think
that then you've got another thing coming;
: : : : : : : : : : : Or should it
be
: : : : : : : : : : : If you think that then you've got another think coming?
:
: : : : : : : : : It is definitely "another think".
: : : : : : : : : No evidence,
just another opinion: I believe the original phrase was: "If you think XXXX, you've
got another THING coming." But somewhere along the line it mutated to "...you've
got another THINK coming." I first heard "think" used by a Disney character.
:
: : : : : : : I know how you folks love documentation, but I don't have any. But
this one is in very current usage so we should get by without doc.
: : : :
: : : : When someone says that they think this or that and you believe them to
be wrong, you say "well, if you think that, then you've got another think comming."
In my house we spoke better Enlish than that. When someone said, I think this
or I thought that, we would say, you've got another thought coming.
: : : :
: : : : ES
: : : : : : : I've just, while Googling both phrases (results are
oddly 6,640 for "got another thing coming" and 1,830 for "got another think coming"),
discovered the following in our own archives, courtesy of the learned Masakim.
I hereby paste it in its entirety.
: : : : : : : *** snip ***
: : : : : :
: "You have another think coming"
: : : : : : : "If you think that, you have
another think coming" means "You are mistaken and will soon have to alter your
opinion". This is now sometimes heard with "thing" in place of "think", but "think"
is the older version. Eric Partridge, in A Dictionary of Catch Phrases, gives
the phrase as "you have another guess coming", "US: since the 1920s, if not a
decade or two earlier". Clearly "think" is closer to "guess" than "thing" is.
The OED gives a citation with "think" from 1937, and no evidence for "thing".
Merriam-Webster Editorial Department writes: "When an informal poll was conducted
here at Merriam-Webster, about 60% of our editors favored 'thing' over 'think,'
a result that runs counter to our written evidence."
: : : : : : : From The
alt.usage.english FAQ File
: : : : : : : *** end snip ***
: : : : : : : A
couple of websites I visited claim that this phrase is changing from its original
deliberately and humorously ungrammatical form to a grammatically correct form
that misses the point - because people are overly keen to avoid errors. However,
most authorities, such as they are, seem to go with "another think". I'd suspect
that the phrase originally had slight sarcastic overtones implying stupidity,
similar perhaps to another deliberately ungrammatical usage, as follows:-
:
: : : : : : "Elizabeth Taylor's got married again - well gee, who'da thunk it?"
:
: : : : : Yes, I agree - it is deliberately ungrammatical. Apropos of nothing
in particular, a colleague of mine always signs himself 'evil ditto lad' when
agreeing with something - it's an anagram of his name.
: : : : : : I've only
ever heard this as 'think' and, until now, wasn't aware there was any debate about
it. No evidence on offer from here, but doesn't the think version have the advantage
that it makes sense whereas the thing version doesn't? What would the thing be
but another thought anyway?
: : : : : I don't see that "thing" doesn't make
sense. After all, the thing could be an event or a rude awakening and needn't
be simply another though. I actually had never come across the "think" version
until this discussion, but then it's not something I recall seeing in print. Especially
in the United States where consonants tend to be softer than the UK, I think one
might be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two versions just by
listening.
: : : : Maybe this in in use in the US but no one I've ever heard
in the UK uses 'thing' in that phrase. In my view the thing version is just plain
wrong, and possibly the result of mishearing the phrase.
: : : : I can't agree
that the thing version makes any kind of sense. "If you think that you've another
thing coming" isn't grammatical. To have another thing you need a previous thing.
: : : : Mind you people are happy to put their best foot forward, which implies
they have three or more feet.
: : : Okay - just toying with this a little...
:
: : I'm not sure I see how it's ungramatical, illogical and twisted, maybe. I
mean when you consider that "think" is verb and not noun, well isn't quibbling
about "another thing" a bit like the pot calling the kettle black? Especially
since the "thing" could be a thought? Is there a lesser of two evils where grammar
is concerned?
: : : I haven't got strong feelings either way, but I'm not sure
I can bring myself to use "think" since I will inevitably feel like I am doing
bad German accent. Not that anyone else sounds like this. I think it's probably
just my own phonetical bugaboo. (buggaboo?)
: : (Bugaboo). I feel morally obliged
to point out that "think" is indeed also a perfectly valid noun in its own right
- "let me have a think about that". This from the American Heritage Dictionary:-
:
: THINK
: : NOUN: The act or an instance of deliberate or extended thinking;
a meditation.
: : What's staggered me in all this is the almost 4 to 1 ratio
of the clearly incorrect "thing" version over the "think" version that Google
turned up. Have the do-gooders now turned from well-intentioned but utterly ridiculous
political correctness to a similar grammatical correctness? I think we should
have a junta.
: I feel badly now. I swear I looked up "think" in the very same
dictionary today and couldn't find it listed as a noun. I think I need a sabbatical.
"Think"
isn't a noun in the 1969 edition. Fallen must have a more recent one.
- Ps
Word Camel 10/12/02 (0)
- Re: Think (n.)
TheFallen 10/12/02 (4)
|