[Ads-l] To both-have

[Joel Berson]

On another front, isn't the "both" superfluous, given that twins implies two and the later presence of "same"?  "Identical twins were no more likely than fraternal twins to have the same phenotype" seems quite sufficient.


Was that Wilson's point, or was he concerned about both/each/all?

Joel

      From: Benjamin Barrett <gogaku at IX.NETCOM.COM>
 To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU 
 Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2015 9:40 PM
 Subject: Re: [ADS-L] To both-have
   
This seems like normal usage to me. The word "both" can be replaced with 
"each" or "all," for example.

I'm not sure what part of speech this is, and the Oxford Dictionary site 
(https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/both?searchDictCode=all) 
doesn't clarify it for me.

Benjamin Barrett
Formerly of Seattle, WA

Learn Ainu! https://sites.google.com/site/aynuitak1/home

> Wilson Gray <mailto:hwgray at GMAIL.COM>
> 30 August 2015 at 14:11
>
> Wikipedia:
>
> "Identical twins were no more likely than fraternal twins to both have the
> same phenotype <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype>."
>

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



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