Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#148277 09/24/05 03:56 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
zmjezhd Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel
OP Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Another thread forced me to quit the computer screen and walk into the library to consult what others have said about plural none.

First, in 1926, H. W. Fowler, whom none call a descriptivist, had this to say: "none. 1. It is a mistake to suppose that the pronoun is sing. only & must at all costs be followed by sing. verbs, &c.; the OED explicitly states that the pl. construction is commoner. 2. The forms none so, none too are idiomatic (It is none so pleasant to learn that you have only six months to live; The look he gave me was none too amiable), but are perhaps seldom used without a certain sense of condescending to the vernacular as an aid to heartiness of manner or emphasis; & condescension is always repellent." Damned well said, Hank. Who'd've thought we would've agreed.

The entry on none in Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage says inter alia: "The origin of the notion [that none is singular] is simple enough to discover—the etymology of the word. Lounsbury 1908 supposed that "some student of speech" thought it to be a contraction of no one. Actually the etymology explanation is at least as old as Lindley Murray 1795. Murray, after recording that "None is used in both numbers" goes on to observe, "It seems originally to have signified according to its derivation, not one, and therefore to have had no plural ..." Murray is, in fact, only half right here. The Old English nan "none" was in fact formed from ne "not" and an "one," but Old English nan was inflected for both singular and plural. Hence it never existed in the singular only; King Alfred the Great used it as a plural as long ago as A.D. 888."

The OED citation mentioned is: "þæt þær nane oðre an ne sæton buton þa weorþestan."

Strunk & White 1959 says that none "takes the singular verb." But the 1979 edition allows for a plural verb when none suggest "more than one thing or person."

This is but one example of how prescriptivists not only sometimes get things wrong but actually do damage to that which they wish to conserve by removing that which is fit.



Ceci n'est pas un seing.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
I s'pose if it was good enough for King Alfred the Great, it oughta be good enough for me.



Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,316
Members9,182
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Ineffable, ddrinnan, TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV
9,182 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 342 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,542
wofahulicodoc 10,533
LukeJavan8 9,916
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5