I wonder about the extent to which semantic fields might each contribute its own syntax to English. For example, the color terms are regularly either adjective-like or noun-like. Numbers do the same thing in their way.
But, speaking of numbers and conjunctions, consider "and" and "or." When you look at numbers as words we contrast "forty-six" with "four hundred and sixty." They used to say "six and forty." Some say that the "and" should not be used except for expressing a fraction: "four hundred sixty and forty-six hundredths." There seems to be some force of logic (from the banking industry) taking hold of our linguistic conventions. Especially in modern times there seem to be many new conventions entering the syntax of language being forced on us by logic. It seems to be telling us that logic is more reliable, mathematically sound, scientifically justifiable. Maybe we should start using "and/or" for inclusive "or." ("The stipulated punishment is a jail term and/or a fine.") Logic uses "v" to signify exclusive "or." This comes from the Latin "vel," yet the Romans had a separate word, "aut," for the exclusive "or." So even the language of logic is illogical. (We've learned on another thread how the British and many others think my punctuation is illogical.)
Bruce
>>> Nancy Tuten <[log in to unmask]> 02/29/08 6:19 AM >>>
The word "but" can fill all three slots, of course, but in answer to Peter's
question, I would point out that the meaning remains fairly consistent even
when the word is used in different roles. Just as "but" can be a preposition
replacing "except," some writers/speakers use "except" as a coordinating
conjunction:
I thought about going to the store, except I didn't have any money.
I would caution writers against such a construction, just as I would caution
them not to use "like" as a subordinating conjunction. But it is easy to see
why they would be tempted to replace "but" with "except" in a sentence such
as this one if they hadn't memorized the list of seven words widely accepted
as coordinating conjunctions.
Aren't we back to the notion of style--what I think of as linguistic
etiquette? Using "but" as a preposition works *and* it has long been
accepted as a legitimate preposition. On the other hand, even though
"except" works just fine as a coordinating conjunction (that is, the meaning
isn't lost), many people consider it "wrong."
A similar example would be confusion over the usage of "like" and "as":
"like" functions just fine as a subordinating conjunction (that is, the
intended meaning isn't lost when it is substituted for "as"), but
stylistically many people still consider it "wrong."
I'm about to start the revision process for a second edition of a book of
writing "tips" a colleague and I published about seven years ago, and I'm
almost to the point that I want to divide the entire book up into two major
sections: (1) those "rules" that are important to know because the
professional world thinks they are and educated people are supposed to know
them (linguistic etiquette, matters of style and usage) and (2) those
issues/rules that are important to know because they significantly affect
clarity of meaning or precision of expression (modification issues,
agreement issues, parallel structure, etc).
I am certain that I am going to start making that distinction in the one and
only grammar course that our English majors are required to take. I have
been doing so to some extent for years, actually, but not as intentionally
as I intend to do so now. The course (using Martha Kolln's text
_Understanding English Grammar_) focuses almost exclusively on the latter
issues anyway--syntax, mainly (and, yes, we diagram sentences and my
students consistently say that they are better writers for having done
so)--but students are still lumping that kind of understanding with a
knowledge of "rules" and calling *all* of it "grammar."
Nancy (who obviously had too much coffee for breakfast, Herb!)
Nancy L. Tuten, PhD
Professor of English
Director of the Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program
Columbia College
Columbia, South Carolina
[log in to unmask]
803-786-3706
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of STAHLKE, HERBERT F
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:14 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: But as a preposition?
Interestingly, the OED gives the part of speech of "but" as "prep.,
adv., conj." These distinct usages go back at least to the 9th c. As
to whether it's one word, or two, or three, I fear that depends on your
theory of the lexicon and what you had for breakfast.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Adams
Sent: 2008-02-28 22:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: But as a preposition?
Well, then, we (Herb, Nancy, and I, agree. But then I'm wondering
(and this harks back to my question of a week ago about "red" and
"snow") is this "but" a different word from the coordinating
conjunction "but," that just happens to be spelled and pronounced the
same way, or is this the same word which can be in either of two
lexical classes depending on context, or is this "but" the
coordinating conjunction (form) being used as a preposition (function)?
Peter, who admits he's becoming a little obsessed with this
question . . .
Peter Adams
On Feb 28, 2008, at 9:13 PM, STAHLKE, HERBERT F wrote:
> Yes, it can. In the example you give, one could substitute a
> undisputed
> preposition like "except" and get the same meaning. With different
> meanings we can substitute other prepositions and the structure
> remains
> the same: behind, with, ahead of, after, near, under, above, etc. So
> it fills a slot that is a prepositional slot. It's semantic
> connection
> to the coordinating conjunction "but" is remote.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Adams
> Sent: 2008-02-28 20:34
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: But as a preposition?
>
> In a sentence like this
>
> Everyone but Craig is going to the movies.
>
> what lexical class is "but"? Can it be a preposition?
>
> Peter Adams
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
|
