6.0614 Rs: Scanner; Address; Caring Less? (5/100)

Elaine Brennan (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Tue, 23 Mar 1993 18:07:45 EST

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0614. Tuesday, 23 Mar 1993.


(1) Date: 22 Mar 1993 15:07:53 -0600 (CST) (8 lines)
From: RICHARD JENSEN <CAMPBELLD@APSU.BITNET>
Subject: Re: 6.0611 Qs: Scanner; Lists (2/38)

(2) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 15:26:01 -0500 (21 lines)
From: "Daniel Traister" <traister@a1.relay.upenn.edu>
Subject: RE: 6.0611 Qs: Scanner; Lists

(3) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:23:09 +0000 (16 lines)
From: "MARCUS BANKS, ISCA, OXFORD" <banks@vax.ox.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Illogical Constructions

(4) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 11:26 EST (14 lines)
From: "Mary Dee Harris, Language Technology"
<MDHARRIS@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu>
Subject: Caring -- less or not

(5) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 15:56:04 -0600 (41 lines)
From: Alan D Corre <corre@convex.csd.uwm.edu>
Subject: Illogical/negative expressions

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 1993 15:07:53 -0600 (CST)
From: RICHARD JENSEN <CAMPBELLD@APSU.BITNET>
Subject: Re: 6.0611 Qs: Scanner; Lists (2/38)

re portable scanners:
Computer Shopper (March issue page 422), CAD Graphics is selling
adapters for $99 and complete laptop scanners with ocr for $189.
Richard Jensen
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------36----
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 15:26:01 -0500
From: "Daniel Traister" <traister@a1.relay.upenn.edu>
Subject: RE: 6.0611 Qs: Scanner; Lists (2/38)


Al Filreis's e-mail address is

afilreis@mail.sas.upenn.edu@in


Daniel Traister, Department of Special Collections
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
215 898 7088 (phone)
215 898 0559 (fax)
traister@a1.relay.upenn.edu@in (e-mail)



(3) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:23:09 +0000
From: "MARCUS BANKS, ISCA, OXFORD" <banks@vax.ox.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: 6.0607 Qs: Housing in London; Illogical Constructions (2/30)

David Hoekema asks about non-oxymoronic phrases such as "I could care
less what happens to her." While not being able to help in the way he
wishes, it is my understanding that of his three examples, this last is
not found in British English (we would say "I couldn't care less...").
I've heard a similar construction in another N American phrase--which,
needless to say, I can't recall just now--and have wondered how long
this usage has been common - it's very confusing to British ears. I've
also wondered sometimes why Clarke Gable said "Frankly my dear, I
don't give a damn" (or something similar) with the stress on 'give'
not 'damn'.

Marcus Banks, Oxford, UK
(4) --------------------------------------------------------------29----
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 11:26 EST
From: "Mary Dee Harris, Language Technology" <MDHARRIS@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu>
Subject: Caring -- less or not

I always thought that "I could care less" was formed by dropping the
negative in "I couldn't care less." I've noticed many more
situations recently in which these language phenomena occur. Are they
more frequent or am I just noticing more?

Mary Dee Harris, Ph.D. 202/387-0626 (voice)
Language Technology, Inc. 202/387-0625 (FAX)
2153 California St. NW mdharris@guvax.georgetown.edu
Washington, DC 20008 mdharris@guvax.bitnet

(5) --------------------------------------------------------------54----
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 15:56:04 -0600
From: Alan D Corre <corre@convex.csd.uwm.edu>
Subject: Illogical/negative expressions

An illogical phrase which has struck me in English is "Much good may it
do you! (him etc.)" which, in my speech at least, is only used sarcastically,
that is to say it is equivalent to "May you choke on it!" or some such
negative wish. I only became aware of this when, after complimenting a
good meal, I had a very old man say to me: "Much good may it do you!" and I
realized that he meant literally what he was saying. In this instance the
original meaning has been pushed out by the sarcastic usage. There is a
similar situation with the phrase "escapado de mal" used by Spanish
speaking Jews originally used to mean something like "May no harm befall
him/her" especially when speaking of children if some reference was made
to their cuteness, cleverness etc. Younger people, less prone to pious
ejaculations, more often use it when, for example, someone overfills a
plate or does some other greedy or outrageous act, so it is losing its
original positive meaning and becoming negative. (I just asked a native
Spanish speaker from northern Spain about this expression and she was
unaware of it in either use.)

With regard to the use of klum in Hebrew, I think the best development of
negatives is seen in French. Late Latin ego non vadeo passum gives the
French je ne vais pas "I do not go a step", where "step" adds emphasis.
This usage comes to be generalized so that you can say je ne vois pas "I
do not see..." where "step" is semantically inappropriate and has simply
become a signal of the negative, and so it can be used in pas par la "not
that way!" where the original negative ne/non has disappeared completely.
In similar fashion LL ego non video rem "I don't see a thing" becomes French
je ne vois rien. Rien then acquires a negative connotation i.e. nothing
rather than thing, something, and may be used by itself. Another morpheme
(causa > Fr. chose) moves in to fill the gap left by rem. It is interesting
to note that in colloquial Arabic shi (< classical Arabic shay' "thing") is
similarly used as a negative, but functioning like pas in French, ma shufet
shi "I didn't go (a thing)" where the ma which is the true negative can be
omitted.
Now as to klum. I do not know for sure the etymology of this word, probably
kul "all" + ma uma "whatever", but it was in any case originally positive,
i.e. "something". But it underwent the same kind of change that I indicated
for French and Arabic, having the negative connotation brush off onto it,
and permitting its use as a negative without the explicit lo "not".