On 28/05/2014 2:05 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 at 21:40:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/27/2014 2:22 PM, w0rp wrote:
I'm actually a native speaker of 25 years and I didn't get it at
first. Natural
language communicates ideas approximately.
What bugs me is when people say:
I could care less.
when they mean:
I couldn't care less.
and:
If you think that, you have another thing coming.
when they mean:
If you think that, you have another think coming.
Whats wrong with "If you think that, you have another thing coming."?
I've always understood it sort of like say your Father saying:
"If you think that [i.e. you can steal your little brother's ice cream
cone], then you have another thing [i.e no ice cream, but maybe the
leather strap] coming."
I couldn't resist looking up this debate, and its quite a fiery one with
no clear winner! There is no clear origin to the phrase and equal
arguments for and against both forms.
My personal view is that the thinGists are right, because I often use
the word believe in the first half, i.e. "if you believe that, then you
have another thing coming." I wouldn't tell anyone that they had another
belief coming, as in my experience my opinions have very little impact
on the beliefs of others.
Also, grammatically speaking, if I was expecting someone to change their
mind, I like to think that I'd more likely say that they had another
thought coming, or "If you think that, then you have another thought to
come." Not because think can never be a noun, I often say "lets have a
think."
A...
