I'm not going to ask how you all feel about "per say." I can't take the disappointment.

Just because some people don't know Latin doesn't mean "per say" is right, either!

Because of the internet, I now look at the word "misled" and think "mizzled."

It's only tired and lame if it's been used overmuch, which would only be true if it were used.

Well, no; I heard it for the first time today and had the same reaction as I have to those supposedly amusing greeting cards that put the "pun" back in "punchline".

The fact that any given person has never heard it before doesn't mean it hasn't been used or isn't correct.

First part: given. Second part: what do you mean by "correct"? It conveys meaning, it's a successful piece of communication. I wouldn't use "correct" for that, but still, it's better than the alternative. It has continuity - again, possibly a virtue, probably not something I'd describe as "correct". (Unless it's the answer to "How was this phrase first coined?".) It's grammatically incorrect, though it was correct when first coined.

I maintain that "if you think that, then you've got another thing coming" is nonsense.

Well, here first we see that "You've got another thing coming" is more versatile, since you don't need it to start with "If you think that...". Second, in that construction, whatever they were thinking was the case is state of affairs A; the other thing coming is state of affairs B. I confess I'm lost why anyone thinks "You've got another thing coming" is so impenetrable.

Did my vehemence kill the thread?

apparently not, then

Or did everyone just go to bed? What time is it anyway... You know, working from home means there's very little incentive to fix a fucked-up sleep schedule.

Because of the internet, I now look at the word "misled" and think "mizzled."

When I first learned to read, I had this same problem with "naked". I assumed that it was one syllable, and presumably the past tense of "to nake", whatever that was. It took a few years before I connected it with the spoken two-syllable word (with which, being a small boy, I was eminently familiar).

I think now's a perfect time to segueway into the topic of per say.

billytea, are you sure you've never heard anyone say "another think coming" because you've never heard either version of the phrase, or because you're sure they said "thing"?

"if you think that, then you've got another thing coming" is nonsense

Yeah--I've yet to see the explanation for that making sense, but...is the angle that it doesn't need to? If so, why not? It's the expression that's sometimes being shortened.

UNTIL NOW

::unchecks docking on Steph's file::

Okay--Elementary can't be proper Sherlock Holmes, because he says he sometimes hates it when he's right. *I* don't even hate it when I'm right. Sherlock Holmes certainly doesn't.

And, wow, ,I keep watching Person of Interest, and I keep reeling at how bad the dialogue is. These are not humans.

Speaking of non-humans.

billytea, are you sure you've never heard anyone say "another think coming" because you've never heard either version of the phrase, or because you're sure they said "thing"?

I've heard people say "you've got another thing coming". I don't think I've ever heard "If you think that, you've got another thing coming". Well, before today.

Yeah--I've yet to see the explanation for that making sense

See above. The "other thing" does not correspond with the thought, but with the content or object of that thought.

I've heard people say "you've got another thing coming"

Given how swallowed the pronunciation can be, I would have said I'd never heard anyone say "another thing coming" until I'd read it myself. I figured they were saying what I knew, until I knew there were two things--and even now, it's hard to tell. That's why I ask.

The "other thing" does not correspond with the thought, but with the content or object of that thought.

Then contexts in which I am used to it, there is a second thought, not a second...thing. The expression means "think again", not .... see? I confused myself already, and I've been reading explanations of the heresy all day.

Unrelatedly, I am loving Suri's Burn Book for all the distilled mean I'm no longer getting from the Fug Girls and it amuses the fuck out of me that it's being published in meatspace. Celebrity is so confusing these days.

I don't know who Halford is, and I don't' care if you tell me, I will still not know.

Everyone was so caught up with two perfectly cromulent idioms, you all let this pass without comment. FOR SHAME.

Then contexts in which I am used to it, there is a second thought, not a second...thing. The expression means "think again", not .... see? I confused myself already, and I've been reading explanations of the heresy all day.

I thought the expression(s) meant "You're wrong", or maybe "You're about to find out how wrong you are" (further implications of which would be contextual). I can parse either expression that way. I can't really parse "you've got another think coming" as "think again", because the latter leaves open the possibility that the thinker will do so and still arrive at the same thought. The former reads like a statement of fact (or at least a promise), the latter an exhortation.

I can't really parse "you've got another think coming" as "think again", because the latter leaves open the possibility that the thinker will do so and still arrive at the same thought.

Well, no. The points are a) you're gonna rewind, have your thought again but b) this time your conclusion will be the correct one, i.e. mine.

You had a think--it turned out wrong--so go back to your room and don't come back out until you've had the think we both know is right, young man!

I will freely admit I paged back 90 or so posts and didn't actually see the post that explained what the thing was.