which we're going to get through this

Jonathan Lighter wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM
Fri Jun 5 00:17:00 UTC 2009

My theory is  that the construction began (and possibly renews itself from
time to time) in a vague intention to relativize and subordinate which then
fizzles out for any number of reasons.

Herb's ex., as I say, seems to mean "but" rather than "and."  This seems
*very* weird to me.


On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Arnold Zwicky <zwicky at stanford.edu> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Arnold Zwicky <zwicky at STANFORD.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: which we're going to get through this
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Jun 4, 2009, at 7:45 AM, Jon Lighter wrote:
> > I can hardly believe that the records on this are so scanty.
> >
> > The construction may well be regional.  Despite Woody Allen,  I never
> > noticed it in NYC speech.
> hard to know.  i've suspected that many examples might just have been
> seen as inadvertent errors (and some of them might be) and so
> disregarded.
> jon and i noticed examples in student writing simply because part of
> our job was to attend to the details of this writing.  others might
> not have been so attentive.
> (but i've been away from heavy exposure to undergraduate writing for
> some years, and i wasn't collecting such examples then.)
> still, it would be good to have at least some more data.
> my recollection of these examples is that people are using "which" to
> introduce an addition to the main clause -- perhaps because they've
> been taught not to use "and" so much and so go for something more
> weighty and serious.
> arnold
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

More information about the Ads-l mailing list