Superlative form of OE "neah" from which we derive "nigh."
tj
On Wednesday 12/29/2010 at 1:32 pm, Craig Hancock wrote:
> So the first shall be first and the last shall be last. Where
> did
> "next" come in?
>
> Craig>
>
> Craig,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree that "last" behaves like an ordinal in the ad, an odd sort of
>> ordinal though since, like "first," it's an ordinal that began as a
>> superlative and grammaticalized. "First," of course, is cognate to
>> German
>> Fürst "prince." However, its superlative status is much older
>> than for
>> "last," which is around in Middle English. "First" as a superlative
>> goes
>> all the way back to Proto-Germanic, a couple of millennia older than
>> "last." It did, after all, come first and last last.
>>
>>
>>
>> Herb
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 10:19 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Independent clause or noun phrase
>>
>>
>>
>> Herb,
>>
>> It looks like I mistyped at the start of my post. I meant to
>> say "I
>> don't think people would normally say "the two last people on earth."
>>
>> The normal (or default) would be "the last two people on earth."
>>
>> That's not to say your point isn't well made. We need to be
>> careful
>> about "normal." And "the two last people on earth is certainly
>> possible," which means it can act as an adjective. On the other hand,
>> frequency is a very important part of meaning, and it does create a
>> great deal of stability in the system. I don't think of these as
>> "rules" so much because, as you say, we have a great deal of
>> flexibility. But I would stand by my analysis of "the last grill brush
>> you will ever need" as using "last" as an ordinal numeral. If it was
>> simply "the latest" grill brush, the whole force of the ad would
>> collapse. They are advertising durability and satisfaction. They want,
>> I think, to imply that you will never need or want another one,
>> however hyperbolic that might be.
>>
>> There may not be a normal in intonation, but there are stable
>> relations between meaning and form. I can intone a statement as a
>> question by a rise in pitch. We can signal a word group as restrictive
>> or non-restrictive through intonation. In general, given is not
>> intonationally stressed, but new information is given tonic
>> prominence.
>>
>> One of my favorite old words is "quick", which once meant
>> "living" if
>> my memory is correct. And "kind," which was once closer to "natural."
>>
>> We do have those remnants: "the quick and the dead"; "in kind." I
>> agree
>> that "last" has some of its history intact.
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> Craig,
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> As you're aware from both your functional and your cognitive work,
>>
>>>
>>> what we would normally say depends entirely on situation. It wouldn't
>>
>>>
>>> be hard to come up with a suitable context, say, a murder
>>
>>>
>>> investigation trying to narrow down who saw the victim last. I'm not
>>
>>>
>>> sure there is a "normal" in sentence structure, at least not in the
>>
>>>
>>> sense I think you're using the term. As Susan Schmerling put it a
>>
>>>
>>> long time ago in her dissertation on intonation, "There is no normal
>>
>>>
>>> sentence intonation." ToBI analyses of English intonation bear that
>>> out.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Last," of course, behaves both as an ordinal and as a superlative,
>>
>>>
>>> not surprising given its origin as a superlative and subsequent
>>
>>>
>>> grammaticalization and reduction followed by the later development of
>>
>>>
>>> the doublet "latest." Words carry their history with them and not
>>
>>>
>>> infrequently upset our analyses because of it. Think of
>>
>>>
>>> /cleave/clove/cloven/cleft/cleaved and all the specializations there
>>
>>>
>>> arising from an OE strong verb and an OE weak verb. The two verbs are
>>
>>>
>>> identical now, but they've left the lexicon littered with their
>>> castoffs.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Herb
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>>
>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>
>>>
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>>
>>>
>>> Sent: Friday, December 24, 2010 11:15 AM
>>
>>>
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: Independent clause or noun phrase
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Herb,
>>
>>>
>>> I don't think we would normally say "She was one of the last
>>> two
>>
>>>
>>> people to see him alive." Normal would be "the last two people," which
>>
>>>
>>> is the usual order for ordinal and cardinal numerals. It is strange to
>>
>>>
>>> say "the last second man" because there can only be one second man.
>>
>>>
>>> ("This would differ if you meant something like "second baseman" or
>>
>>>
>>> "second violinist"; last would be Ok there because they act like a
>>
>>>
>>> compound noun (a set phrase.)
>>
>>>
>>> I think there are occasions when "last" would mean something
>>> like
>>
>>>
>>> "latest." The "last report" and "latest report" both leave open the
>>
>>>
>>> chance of a new report, though there are contexts in which "last"
>>
>>>
>>> would be a final element. "The last words she spoke," for example,
>>
>>>
>>> would mean something very different from "the latest words she spoke".
>>
>>>
>>> "Latest" would tend to translate to "most recent" and last would
>>
>>>
>>> usually be qualified with a point in time: "before she died" or
>>
>>>
>>> "before she left for Paris."
>>
>>>
>>> In the sentence in question, I think "last" is acting like an
>>
>>>
>>> ordinal numeral. "This is the latest grill brush she will ever need"
>>
>>>
>>> doesn't mean the same thing.
>>
>>>
>>> >
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Craig,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're right that "last" is not a negative polarity item. In this
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> example, "ever" is the negative polarity item. Many negative
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> polarity items occur in irrealis contexts as well, as Bruce pointed
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> out, and it's the "will" that provides the irrealis context in the
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> sentence we're talking about. I got the function of "last" wrong.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Last," however, behaves like the superlative it is, arising
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> historically from OE "latost." "Last" and "latest" are a doublet in
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> modern English and "latest" developed in the 15th c. We can say,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> for example, "She was one of the two last people to see him alive"
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> or, as in the film title, "The Last Man on Earth." These are both
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> places where an number word cannot occur. We can get "the second
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> last man on earth" but not "the last second man on earth." This
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> suggests that "last" is an adjective. Semantically it overlaps with
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ordinals and also can as an ordinal, just as nouns can function as
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> other lexical categories.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Herb
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 7:08 PM
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: Independent clause or noun phrase
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would classify "last" as an ordinal numeral: first,
>>>> second,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> third...last. Different grammars differ in where they draw the lines
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> for the determiners, but ordinal numbers are often in that group
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> (sometimes called postdeterminers since they come after the core
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> determiners like "a," "the," "this," "his" and so on). It has an
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> identifying function. The one we are talking about (the one in
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> reference) is the last one.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it has negative polarity, just the sense that in
>>>> the
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> continuing list of "grill brushes" this is the final one. You can
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> negate it: this is not the last grill brush you will ever need."
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe "ever" doesn't extend as much as never because "forever"
>>>> is
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> an option (whereas "fornever" is not). "You will need the grill brush
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> forever."
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Craig>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The last grill brush you will ever need.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this a sentence at all? To assume an understood "This is" or "It
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> is" won't account for it as they have very different meaning
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> possible references. One almost demands that the brush be in the
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> vicinity for reference. The other might well reference a brush that
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> has yet to be created.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd take "ever" as a simple adverb with the caveat that it must
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> precede the verb it modifies. Perhaps it also needs something such
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> as "will" in front of it.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The understood "that" not stated in the clause is a relative pronoun
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> that serves as the direct object of "will need."
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is "last" anything more than a simple adjective? Does it function
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> any differently than, say, "ultimate"?
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> tj
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday 12/23/2010 at 7:45 am, Scott Lavitt wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Happy holidays all.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been a member of this listserve for years and occasionally
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seek your collective opinion. Question: how does one parse the
>>>>>> following?:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The last grill brush you will ever need.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could see this as an independent clause, with "you" as the subj.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and "The last grill brush" as the DO, but that doesn't seem right.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems there is an implied "It is," making the above a noun phrase,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and therefore not an independent clause. Thoughts?
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott Lavitt
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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/
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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/