Timeline for Expect: How to disambiguate dual meaning?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 2016 at 16:43 | answer | added | aparente001 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Sep 29, 2016 at 15:18 | comment | added | Lambie | @Peter Shor Those two sentences you have use expect the same way. The difference in them is not in the word expect. You can put in: I have the expectation that X versus I have the expectation that [you x] and expect means the same thing. The semantic trait is for: to have the expectation that in both cases. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 23:07 | vote | accept | Ian Newson | ||
| Sep 28, 2016 at 20:29 | history | edited | Ian Newson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 14:34 | comment | added | 1006a | The easiest way to clarify that the sentence is meant as a prediction rather than as a command is to reword so you can include a degree of uncertainty: I expect (that) I (might / probably will) not hear from you again. The suggested "that" version is good, but might be still too subtle. This could be a UK/US difference (I'm an AmE speaker). To make it definitely a command, verging on a threat, add a tag: I expect not to hear from you again—**understood?** Or Got it? if you're feeling especially belligerent. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:06 | answer | added | Centaurus | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @Lambie You can almost always move up or down in the level of detail or abstraction of an idea expressed by a given phrasing or word to consider its similarities and dissimilarities with another phrasing or word. Two different phrasings or words almost never carry precisely the same meaning, but if they are even tangentially related, you can almost always abstract away enough detail that they become roughly equivalent. But dismissing a difference in a more detailed meaning by referring to a more abstract meaning than that referenced is not a good way to approach semantics. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | Peter Shor | @Lambie: there is a huge difference in pragmatic meaning. But they're generally distinguished by grammar. If your boss says "I expect you to finish this job three days early," you work your ass off. If your boss says "I expect that you'll finish this job three days early," you probably feel pleased that he has such great confidence in your abilities. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 13:04 | answer | added | Lawrence | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:58 | comment | added | Lambie | @Janus Bahs Jacquet I see. How do semantics "work"? | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:56 | history | edited | Ian Newson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:55 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @Lambie The fact that all the definitions of expect are about a person’s expectations for/of something doesn’t change the fact that they mean different things. That’s not how semantics work. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:55 | comment | added | Ian Newson | @P.O. That is probably the best course of action, but I was hoping for an answer which still used the work expect. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:53 | comment | added | Lambie | No, there isn't a difference. All three are about what the speaker's expectation is with regard to a person or a future situation. The only difference is the object (not grammatical) of that expectation, what it refers to....but meaning-wise it is the same. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:49 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | “I expect not to hear from you again” would not be very ambiguous either: it is a polite way of saying, “Don't contact me again”. The other meaning, “I have no expectation of hearing from you again, but it may still happen”, would be “I don't expect to hear from you again”. @Lambie There certainly is a difference in meaning. I don't see what this has to do with taking the piss. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:40 | review | Close votes | |||
| Sep 29, 2016 at 18:41 | |||||
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:39 | comment | added | Lambie | This kind of question is what the Brits call taking the piss. There is no difference in meaning. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:36 | history | edited | Helmar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body; edited title
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:26 | comment | added | P. O. | use a synonym construct that doesn't bear this ambiguity: I hope not to hear form you again vs I'll probably not be hearing from you again | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:18 | comment | added | Ian Newson | @EdwinAshworth Understood, but I'd be using this phrase in text. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:16 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | In conversation, by the emphases and cadences. But not in print without context. English is far from perfect (however one defines 'perfect'). | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:15 | history | edited | Hot Licks | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
duel -> dual
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 12:03 | history | edited | Ian Newson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 11:56 | history | asked | Ian Newson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |