P + "of"

[Wilson Gray]

arnold writes:

"i don't need no steenkin' _Viagra_ to think _hard_ about
points of grammar."

Excellent return! ROTFLMAO!

-Wilson


On 5/31/06, Arnold M. Zwicky <zwicky at csli.stanford.edu> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Arnold M. Zwicky" <zwicky at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: P + "of"
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On May 30, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Larry Horn wrote, about the "double
> possessive" or "double genitive":
>
> > Bolinger's generalization comes into play here too.  "a book of
> > Pete's" =/= "a book of Pete",
>
> "a book of Pete"? possibly meaning 'a book about Pete", though it's
> hard for me to get any interpretation at all.  "a story of Pete" 'a
> story about Pete' seems better, i don't know why.  in any case, "a
> book of Pete's" and "a story of Pete's" are different.
>
> now, for "a picture of Pete/him" things are clear: this is a picture
> depicting him, while "a book of Pete's/his" is one that he possesses
> or that he wrote. (cue long long story of picture nouns.) discussion
> of the picture cases goes back at least to Priestly 1798
>
> > and of course "a book of me/you" is
> > impossible alongside "a book of mine/yours".
>
> similarly with "a friend of me/you" and "a favorite thing of me/you"
> and many other types.  obligatory double possessive for pronominal
> possessors, with certain (well, most) head nouns.  and then there's
> this wonderful example Priestly cited from Tristram Shandy: "this
> exactness of his".
>
> the construction goes back at least to chaucer, but grammarians
> didn't start to worry about it until the 18th century, on grounds of
> "logic", of course.  nice brief discussion in MWDEU (under "double
> genitive", which is what Priestly called it).
>
> > I suspect arnold has
> > thought long and hard (if not viagrously)
>
> [allusion to Outil discussion of the adjective derived from
> "Viagra".  hey, i don't need no steenkin' Viagra to think hard about
> points of grammar.



> > about minimal pairs based
> > on single vs. double possessives.
>
> on and off, since grad school, inspired by Jespersen's MEG.  my
> current favorite is the contrast between
>    (1) friends of Larry Horn     /    (2) friends of Larry Horn's
> with (2) conveying a sense of mutuality (hence, closeness) absent in
> (1).  in consequence, the second variant is a bit odd for head nouns
> normally denoting non-reciprocal relationships:
> ?fans/supporters of Larry Horn's.  and the second variant is really
> bizarre for inanimate possessors: friends of the Sterling Memorial
> Library, #friends of the Sterling Memorial Library's.
>
> arnold
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

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