internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: Gina Norman <gina AT vnet.net>
- To: InterNetWorkers <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: Re: For y'all's enjoyment
- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 17:34:47 -0500 (EST)
> or how about "might-could"... this one is like fingernails scraping a
> chalkboard to my northern ears...
Though I can understand why it might be startling to one who has not grown
up "round here," I've got to say that the grammatical construct "might
could" -- or more strongly, "might should" -- is incredibly useful.
I don't know about everyone, but there actually is a *connotative*
difference between "might" and "might could":
1) You can use "might could" in place of might when you're trying to be
tactful when presenting advice, as in "You might could take that car down
offa them blocks and put it in the backyard" or "You might could use some
of that hair spray and stick some of them bits down on top."
In either case the sentiment ("Get your decrepit old vehicle out of my
front yard" or "Get some hair spray immediately because it looks like your
'do' was created by a crazy man wielding a sling blade") is softened by
the "might."
2) "Might could" is also useful for expressing uncertainty, as in "You
might could get some of them at Walgreens...," meaning "I think Walgreens
may have some, but I'm not completely certain."
I am also fond of "mayhap" and "smell of it" (other variants "taste of
it"). My ex-stepmother, who hailed from Zebulon, used to say "smell of
it," as in: "I just got this perfume.. smell of it." It's an interesting
construct because it makes smell and taste parallel to sight: You look
*at* something, so shouldn't you also smell *of* it?
bye now,
Gina
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Available now -- the **NEW** and **IMPROVED** .sig! Does more and costs
less than the old .sig!! Be the first on your block to own this modern
miracle of technology!!!
Really.
Gina Norman And the only bit that
gina AT vnet.net (me personally) really matters:
ginanorm AT nortelnetworks.com (me at work) http://users.vnet.net/gina
gina AT earthling.net (me personally, again -- sick of me yet? ;)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~;)~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
-
Re: For y'all's enjoyment
, (continued)
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, j. alfred prufrock, 03/03/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, David Parker, 03/03/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Michael Thomas, 03/03/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, B Holroyd, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Paul Jones, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Mary Overby, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Austin, Roger, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Welna.Sarah, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Paul Jones, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, MaryBeth Lackey, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Gina Norman, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, B Holroyd, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Dykki Settle, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Thomas A. Beckett, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Thomas A. Beckett, 03/06/2000
- Re: For y'all's enjoyment, Dave Parker, 03/06/2000
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.