negation + "including" (dangling modifier for free)

[Laurence Horn]

If anyone is really interested in this from a theoretical/empirical
direction, there have been a number of publications by Linda Moxey
and Tony Sanford, including their book _Communicating Quantities_
(1993), on what they call "Comp-set" as opposed to "Ref-set"
reference, i.e. cases in which the reference is to the complement of
the set specified ("Few of the students passed, because they [= the
ones who didn't] hadn't taken the test seriously" vs. "Many of the
students passed, because they [=/= the ones who didn't]...).

Larry

At 7:52 AM -0700 5/5/05, James Smith wrote:
>There was only one "no" vote, by the only person who
>was both a member of the council and a member of the
>dissenters.
>
>
>--- Victoria Neufeldt <vneufeldt at MERRIAM-WEBSTER.COM>
>wrote:
>>  Negation + 'including' doesn't work for me either.
>>  But, man, that
>>  whole sentence needs to be recast: besides the
>>  negation-+-'including'
>>  and the dangling modifier, 'including' doesn't even
>>  make sense here,
>>  because there was only *one* 'no' vote.
>>
>>  Victoria
>>
>>  Victoria Neufeldt
>>  727 9th Street East
>>  Saskatoon, Sask.
>>  S7H 0M6
>>  Canada
>>  Tel: 306-955-8910
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  > -----Original Message-----
>>  > From: American Dialect Society
>>  > [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]On Behalf
>>  > Of Arnold M. Zwicky
>>  > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 4:14 PM
>>  > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>>  > Subject: negation + "including" (dangling modifier
>>  for free)
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > from the Palo Alto Daily News, "City OKs
>>  university land deal" by
>>  > Jason Green, 5/4/05, p. 74:
>>  > -----
>>  > Although touted by university officials and city
>>  staff as a historic
>>  > deal, not everyone was in favor of the agreement,
>>  including council
>>  > member Yoriko Kishimoto.  Of the six council
>>  members
>>  > eligible to vote
>>  > on the Mayfield agreement, Kishimoto cast the sole
>>  "no" vote.
>>  > -----
>>  >
>>  > "not everyone was in favor" implies "there were
>>  people not in
>>  > favor"/"some people were not in favor", and *then*
>>  we get
>>  > an explicit
>>  > reference to a group than kishimoto  can be
>>  asserted to be included
>>  > in.  for me, "not everyone" isn't enough to
>>  support the "including
>>  > NP" phrase.  but i'm guessing that other people's
>>  mileages vary.
>>  >
>>  > arnold
>>  >
>>  > ---
>>  > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>>  > Checked by AVG anti-virus system
>>  (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>  > Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release
>>  Date: 4/15/04
>>  >
>>  ---
>>  Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>>  Checked by AVG anti-virus system
>>  (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>  Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release
>>  Date: 4/15/04
>>
>
>James D. SMITH                 |If history teaches anything
>South SLC, UT                  |it is that we will be sued
>jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com     |whether we act quickly and decisively
>                                |or slowly and cautiously.
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail