![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
another thing, or think
I ran across a Metafilter thread about the expression "if you think that, you've got another (think/thing) coming." If this is a familiar stock expression to you, which version is familiar, "thing" or "think"? Have you heard the other version?
(Warning: the thread is a mashup of this think/thing with an "is 0.999repeating = 1" debate; skim over unless that's something you enjoy.)
My dad and I agreed that it's a familiar expression, and we'd never heard anyone using the wrong word in it, that would sound bizarre, why is there even a thread about this. But it turned out we disagreed on which word is the right one. The usage in the wild is definitely mixed (it skews "thing" in Google web search, "think" in n-gram books search), and he and I apparently each inferred one correct usage, and assimilated the other one to it, without even noticing the mixedness. Yay language.
(Historically, the "think" version appears to have come first as a stock phrase, carrying a "comically unusual grammar" flavor. The "thing" probably came from rationalizing it, and a small phonetic step given that the doubled /k/ sound in "think coming" is commonly reduced. (The OED2 has an earlier cite for "thing", but since its publication they have pushed "think" earlier.))
(Warning: the thread is a mashup of this think/thing with an "is 0.999repeating = 1" debate; skim over unless that's something you enjoy.)
My dad and I agreed that it's a familiar expression, and we'd never heard anyone using the wrong word in it, that would sound bizarre, why is there even a thread about this. But it turned out we disagreed on which word is the right one. The usage in the wild is definitely mixed (it skews "thing" in Google web search, "think" in n-gram books search), and he and I apparently each inferred one correct usage, and assimilated the other one to it, without even noticing the mixedness. Yay language.
(Historically, the "think" version appears to have come first as a stock phrase, carrying a "comically unusual grammar" flavor. The "thing" probably came from rationalizing it, and a small phonetic step given that the doubled /k/ sound in "think coming" is commonly reduced. (The OED2 has an earlier cite for "thing", but since its publication they have pushed "think" earlier.))
no subject
I only recall hearing "thing", but suspect that after saying this I will encounter dozens of cases in which "think" is used in things (thinks? — I don't know which is which anymore!) that I've read a bajillion times without noticing.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Rationalizing how? Because "think" isn't normally a noun?
(I need another sentence pair. It's so I can use preiods to terminate both.)
no subject
JUST LIKE YOU DON'T HEAR THE CAPYBARA'S WINGS.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think I would substitute it in my head for the one I thought was right/liked better and just assume the author/editor had made a mistake of some kind.
no subject
no subject
That was pretty much my major exposure to this phrase/debate until today, which may have been where I got my fixed ideas about 'thing' as correct and right and good.
no subject
Huh.
no subject
no subject
I can't say confidently that I've ever heard "think" as noun outside this phrase and probably "have a smoke and a long think" which is a shade different in meaning: act of thinking rather than content of thought.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Ha ha ha ha ha!
Just think/g, soon enough you'll get to have this debate with your OWN children :)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject