Johanna,
On the "not un+Adj" construction, there was a nice piece, possibly in an early CLS volume, titled "Is a not-unhappy person a happy person?", that argued that the construction is not simply a reversal of polarity but rather an expression of degree such that "not un+Adj" means '"n+Adj" but less so'. This is in contrast to the polarity switching that goes on with multiple negation in the auxiliary:
The suspect was not sleeping.
The suspect wasn't not sleeping.
The suspect has not been sleeping.
The suspect has been not sleeping.
The suspect has not been not sleeping.
The suspect could not have been sleeping.
The suspect could have not been sleeping.
The suspect could have been not sleeping.
The suspect could not have not been sleeping.
The suspect could not have been not sleeping.
The suspect could have not been not sleeping.
The suspect could not have not been not sleeping.
The suspect couldn't not have not been not sleeping.
Anything with more than two negatives in the auxiliary needs the sort of context only Perry Mason could build up during cross-examination.
Or, in that infuriatingly condescending manner of some older textbooks, the demonstration is left to the student.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Johanna Rubba
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: question on why "unwinnable" is not a word
I don't have a problem with "pre-pre-cooked". Given the amount of
processing food undergoes in the modern world, there are probably a
very large number that are pre-pre-cooked! You'd have to have a food
that requires several stages of heat-based preparing before the final
stage that makes it edible or creates the intended dish. Let's say
you're making a dish which requires almonds to be blanched, then
roasted, then sautéed. If you bought almonds that had already been
blanched, you could plausibly call them "pre-pre-cooked", since the
stage of roasting is still pre-cooking in terms of this particular
dish. Not the best example -- I should ask my food-science friend for a
better one from the processed-food world.
As to Bruce's comment "that in English people are not really very
proficient at being creative when it comes to morphological processes
in general", I recommend a good long cruise around wordspy.com.
English-speakers are _extremely_ adept at using morphology to great
effect, whether to invent needed technological or medical terms, terms
for social phenomena ("empty-nesters," "furkids" -- pets that are
virtual children) or humor (having lunch "al desko", or complaining
about a friend who is a "meanderthal" -- one who never gets anywhere in
life because s/he moves aimlessly from one pursuit to another). An
enormous number of English words has been created through morphological
creativity; it is favored method of word creation in English.
The problem with words like "ununwinnable" is a problem of processing
the phonological repetition. But word stress and context can help. I
can easily imagine someone saying "so you undid my terrific repair job
on that engine?? Well, I'm gonna UN-undo it!" meaning "I'm going to do
it all over again". In this case, the two prefixes have the same
meaning as well as form. The extra word stress and the whole context of
the speaker's objection to the undoing aids processing considerably.
We avoid this with words like "unwinnable" by using "not" instead of
"un-", although the meaning is still a bit special. Consider "he's not
unattractive" (with normal word stress on "ac"). This doesn't mean
simply that he isn't ugly, but means something more along the lines of
"he is somewhat attractive" or "he's really worth taking a second look
at". "The race is not unwinnable" would mean to me "there is some
chance of winning the race -- maybe a good chance if we handle it
right".
It's hard to nail down the exact nuance of this "not un-" construction.
It isn't merely intended to undo the negative.
Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
Linguistics Minor Advisor
English Department
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel.: 805.756.2184
Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
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/
|
