From: "Lion" <Nospam@com.sg>
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
References: <Misc-F2DF2B.07131011072005@newssvr14-ext.news.prodigy.com>
Subject: Re: What's with ?
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 18:44:31 +0800
Lines: 28
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: 222.164.46.142
Message-ID: <42d4f09c$1@news.starhub.net.sg>
X-Trace: 13 Jul 2005 18:44:44 +0800, 222.164.46.142
Organization: StarHub Internet Pte Ltd
Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:873
Pardon my ignorance. What's the meaning of 'what's with' in this context.
When written in full, what do these two words stand for ?
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@*your-shoes*PlayNaked.com> wrote ..
>
> I think I first heard this form from Charles Schultz in a Peanuts
> cartoon (I believe Linus spoke it, but this is close to 40 yrs ago, so I
> may be mis-rembering), and it always sounded British to me, but I don't
> actually know if it's considered proper or not, and what the origin
> actually is.
>
> I refer here to the use of "not" before a word that is modified to be
> its own negative as with the prefix "in" or "un". For example, "it is
> not inconceivable that...", in a place where "it is conceivable that..."
> would work just as well.
>
> The cynic in me sort-of half wonders if this practice began with someone
> who was either paid by the column-inch or a student admonished to fill 2
> whole pages. :)
>
> Maybe the reason is sounds British to me is that it seems to fit with
> the stereotype of understatement that is theirs.
>
> At any rate, does anyone know where this form originated, and whether or
> not it is considered proper?
|
|