Re: Think
(n.)
Posted by TheFallen on October 12, 2002 In Reply to: Re: Think (n.) posted by
R. Berg 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.
I don't actually physically possess this dictionary
- the paste is from the American Heritage Dictionary (2000 edition) online, which
I got to as ever via www.bartleby.com.
- Re: Think (n.) Silver Surfer
10/12/02 (3)
|