Wilson Gray hwgray at GMAIL.COM
Thu Jul 2 20:26:30 UTC 2009

"Kill ... dead" is used as an intensive version of "kill." in BE. Of
course, the grammar merely permits this. It doesn't require it. I
don't want it to be thought that I'm crying Wolof.


On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Laurence Horn<laurence.horn at> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender: Â  Â  Â  American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster: Â  Â  Â  Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
> Subject: Â  Â  Â Re: strangled
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> At 10:31 AM -0400 7/2/09, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>>At 7/2/2009 09:45 AM, Arnold Zwicky wrote:
>>>i suspect that many people are inclined to discriminate transitive
>>>"strangle" (normally conveying an endpoint) from transitive "choke
>>>(not necessarily conveying an endpoint).
>>In other words, "strangled" generally means "terminally choked".
> And then there languages like Mandarin, Korean, Hindi, etc., in which
> if you "kill" someone (with a lexical causative) they don't
> necessarily die--you have to kill them dead to be on the safe side.
> And speaking of "terminal(ly)", I just got one of those interminably
> circulating e-mail lists of new useful words and definitions; it
> includes "hipatitis", defined as 'terminal coolness'.
> LH
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society -

All say, "How hard it is that we have to die"---a strange complaint to
come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
-Mark Twain

The American Dialect Society -

More information about the Ads-l mailing list