Using “so isn't” or “so can't” instead of “so is” or “so can”?
Multi tool use
Lately I've heard people using what I think to be a negative response to indicate a positive affirmation, like so:
Example 1
You can touch the basketball rim? Well so can't I!
Example 2
Person A: "Dave can't go today, he's feeling sick."
Person B: "Yeah, so isn't Mark."
In example one, the speaker is re-affirming that he can touch the rim. In example two, Person B is confirming that Mark is also sick. So why can't and isn't instead of can and is?
If this usage is incorrect, is there any root to its prevalence?
For background, I live in New England.
word-usage american-english
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
add a comment |
Lately I've heard people using what I think to be a negative response to indicate a positive affirmation, like so:
Example 1
You can touch the basketball rim? Well so can't I!
Example 2
Person A: "Dave can't go today, he's feeling sick."
Person B: "Yeah, so isn't Mark."
In example one, the speaker is re-affirming that he can touch the rim. In example two, Person B is confirming that Mark is also sick. So why can't and isn't instead of can and is?
If this usage is incorrect, is there any root to its prevalence?
For background, I live in New England.
word-usage american-english
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
1
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
1
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
1
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50
add a comment |
Lately I've heard people using what I think to be a negative response to indicate a positive affirmation, like so:
Example 1
You can touch the basketball rim? Well so can't I!
Example 2
Person A: "Dave can't go today, he's feeling sick."
Person B: "Yeah, so isn't Mark."
In example one, the speaker is re-affirming that he can touch the rim. In example two, Person B is confirming that Mark is also sick. So why can't and isn't instead of can and is?
If this usage is incorrect, is there any root to its prevalence?
For background, I live in New England.
word-usage american-english
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
Lately I've heard people using what I think to be a negative response to indicate a positive affirmation, like so:
Example 1
You can touch the basketball rim? Well so can't I!
Example 2
Person A: "Dave can't go today, he's feeling sick."
Person B: "Yeah, so isn't Mark."
In example one, the speaker is re-affirming that he can touch the rim. In example two, Person B is confirming that Mark is also sick. So why can't and isn't instead of can and is?
If this usage is incorrect, is there any root to its prevalence?
For background, I live in New England.
word-usage american-english
word-usage american-english
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
edited Apr 13 '17 at 15:39
Hellion
53k13108196
53k13108196
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
asked Jan 19 '16 at 13:41
Trevor DTrevor D
5591416
5591416
1
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
1
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
1
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50
add a comment |
1
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
1
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
1
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50
1
1
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
1
1
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
1
1
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
This is widespread, but relatively rare; it's called the so don't I construction.
As it happens, I was one of the first to study this construction, since it's part of my idiolect.
Briefly,
- the negative is essentially spurious, and has no meaning
- the construction is restricted to so-clauses with Subject-Auxiliary Inversion
- the construction is a tag, and echoes an auxiliary from a previous clause, like a tag question
He's leaving tomorrow, isn't he? ~ He's leaving tomorrow, and so isn't she.
(this is also the way normal non-negative so clauses like and so is she work.)
Further details in the links.
Executive Summary: Don't worry about it. English is more various than you expected, that's all.
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
add a comment |
John Lawler nailed it.
The only thing I would add is that this construction usually connotes sarcasm. I'm also a New Englander, and also grew up using it. I still said "so do I" and "so can I" all the time; when I said "so can't I!" it implied that your statement was somehow ridiculous, usually because you're stating the obvious or bragging about a humdrum achievement.
"I can bench press 50 pounds!"
"Yeah? So can't my grandmother!"
In fact the most common occurrence of this construction, in my experience, is in statements like "so can't anyone!" or "so isn't everyone!"
If you follow the link Mr. Lawler gave, the idea of "implicature canceling" meshes nicely. Saying you can do X implies that other people can't. The negative in "So can't I!" cancels that unspoken implication. Usually (in my experience anyway), that situation calls for sarcasm. A linguistics professor pointed out that the construction is used much more by children than by adults, and I offered the speculation that that's why: it's a bit impolite because of the implied sarcasm.
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
add a comment |
please help me which one is correct.
-I can’t believe
-So can’t I or so do I ?
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f300863%2fusing-so-isnt-or-so-cant-instead-of-so-is-or-so-can%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is widespread, but relatively rare; it's called the so don't I construction.
As it happens, I was one of the first to study this construction, since it's part of my idiolect.
Briefly,
- the negative is essentially spurious, and has no meaning
- the construction is restricted to so-clauses with Subject-Auxiliary Inversion
- the construction is a tag, and echoes an auxiliary from a previous clause, like a tag question
He's leaving tomorrow, isn't he? ~ He's leaving tomorrow, and so isn't she.
(this is also the way normal non-negative so clauses like and so is she work.)
Further details in the links.
Executive Summary: Don't worry about it. English is more various than you expected, that's all.
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
add a comment |
This is widespread, but relatively rare; it's called the so don't I construction.
As it happens, I was one of the first to study this construction, since it's part of my idiolect.
Briefly,
- the negative is essentially spurious, and has no meaning
- the construction is restricted to so-clauses with Subject-Auxiliary Inversion
- the construction is a tag, and echoes an auxiliary from a previous clause, like a tag question
He's leaving tomorrow, isn't he? ~ He's leaving tomorrow, and so isn't she.
(this is also the way normal non-negative so clauses like and so is she work.)
Further details in the links.
Executive Summary: Don't worry about it. English is more various than you expected, that's all.
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
add a comment |
This is widespread, but relatively rare; it's called the so don't I construction.
As it happens, I was one of the first to study this construction, since it's part of my idiolect.
Briefly,
- the negative is essentially spurious, and has no meaning
- the construction is restricted to so-clauses with Subject-Auxiliary Inversion
- the construction is a tag, and echoes an auxiliary from a previous clause, like a tag question
He's leaving tomorrow, isn't he? ~ He's leaving tomorrow, and so isn't she.
(this is also the way normal non-negative so clauses like and so is she work.)
Further details in the links.
Executive Summary: Don't worry about it. English is more various than you expected, that's all.
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
This is widespread, but relatively rare; it's called the so don't I construction.
As it happens, I was one of the first to study this construction, since it's part of my idiolect.
Briefly,
- the negative is essentially spurious, and has no meaning
- the construction is restricted to so-clauses with Subject-Auxiliary Inversion
- the construction is a tag, and echoes an auxiliary from a previous clause, like a tag question
He's leaving tomorrow, isn't he? ~ He's leaving tomorrow, and so isn't she.
(this is also the way normal non-negative so clauses like and so is she work.)
Further details in the links.
Executive Summary: Don't worry about it. English is more various than you expected, that's all.
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
answered Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
John LawlerJohn Lawler
84.2k6116330
84.2k6116330
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
add a comment |
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
2
2
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
Oh my God, I've always wanted to see this kind of detailed research and explanation for some of the linguistic things I notice but others can never seem to explain. I heard it at work this morning - which prompted the question - but my fiancee uses it regularly enough to take note of it. The first time I heard her use this, I asked for clarification and corrected her, but to my amazement she didn't understand why I was thrown off. But this explains it quite well.
– Trevor D
Jan 19 '16 at 14:56
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
I'll worry about it only if the nuclear football is involved.
– ab2
Jan 21 '16 at 20:58
add a comment |
John Lawler nailed it.
The only thing I would add is that this construction usually connotes sarcasm. I'm also a New Englander, and also grew up using it. I still said "so do I" and "so can I" all the time; when I said "so can't I!" it implied that your statement was somehow ridiculous, usually because you're stating the obvious or bragging about a humdrum achievement.
"I can bench press 50 pounds!"
"Yeah? So can't my grandmother!"
In fact the most common occurrence of this construction, in my experience, is in statements like "so can't anyone!" or "so isn't everyone!"
If you follow the link Mr. Lawler gave, the idea of "implicature canceling" meshes nicely. Saying you can do X implies that other people can't. The negative in "So can't I!" cancels that unspoken implication. Usually (in my experience anyway), that situation calls for sarcasm. A linguistics professor pointed out that the construction is used much more by children than by adults, and I offered the speculation that that's why: it's a bit impolite because of the implied sarcasm.
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
add a comment |
John Lawler nailed it.
The only thing I would add is that this construction usually connotes sarcasm. I'm also a New Englander, and also grew up using it. I still said "so do I" and "so can I" all the time; when I said "so can't I!" it implied that your statement was somehow ridiculous, usually because you're stating the obvious or bragging about a humdrum achievement.
"I can bench press 50 pounds!"
"Yeah? So can't my grandmother!"
In fact the most common occurrence of this construction, in my experience, is in statements like "so can't anyone!" or "so isn't everyone!"
If you follow the link Mr. Lawler gave, the idea of "implicature canceling" meshes nicely. Saying you can do X implies that other people can't. The negative in "So can't I!" cancels that unspoken implication. Usually (in my experience anyway), that situation calls for sarcasm. A linguistics professor pointed out that the construction is used much more by children than by adults, and I offered the speculation that that's why: it's a bit impolite because of the implied sarcasm.
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
add a comment |
John Lawler nailed it.
The only thing I would add is that this construction usually connotes sarcasm. I'm also a New Englander, and also grew up using it. I still said "so do I" and "so can I" all the time; when I said "so can't I!" it implied that your statement was somehow ridiculous, usually because you're stating the obvious or bragging about a humdrum achievement.
"I can bench press 50 pounds!"
"Yeah? So can't my grandmother!"
In fact the most common occurrence of this construction, in my experience, is in statements like "so can't anyone!" or "so isn't everyone!"
If you follow the link Mr. Lawler gave, the idea of "implicature canceling" meshes nicely. Saying you can do X implies that other people can't. The negative in "So can't I!" cancels that unspoken implication. Usually (in my experience anyway), that situation calls for sarcasm. A linguistics professor pointed out that the construction is used much more by children than by adults, and I offered the speculation that that's why: it's a bit impolite because of the implied sarcasm.
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
John Lawler nailed it.
The only thing I would add is that this construction usually connotes sarcasm. I'm also a New Englander, and also grew up using it. I still said "so do I" and "so can I" all the time; when I said "so can't I!" it implied that your statement was somehow ridiculous, usually because you're stating the obvious or bragging about a humdrum achievement.
"I can bench press 50 pounds!"
"Yeah? So can't my grandmother!"
In fact the most common occurrence of this construction, in my experience, is in statements like "so can't anyone!" or "so isn't everyone!"
If you follow the link Mr. Lawler gave, the idea of "implicature canceling" meshes nicely. Saying you can do X implies that other people can't. The negative in "So can't I!" cancels that unspoken implication. Usually (in my experience anyway), that situation calls for sarcasm. A linguistics professor pointed out that the construction is used much more by children than by adults, and I offered the speculation that that's why: it's a bit impolite because of the implied sarcasm.
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
edited Apr 13 '17 at 14:53
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
answered Apr 13 '17 at 14:37
LennyLenny
212
212
add a comment |
add a comment |
please help me which one is correct.
-I can’t believe
-So can’t I or so do I ?
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
please help me which one is correct.
-I can’t believe
-So can’t I or so do I ?
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
please help me which one is correct.
-I can’t believe
-So can’t I or so do I ?
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
please help me which one is correct.
-I can’t believe
-So can’t I or so do I ?
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
answered 10 mins ago
user332490user332490
1
1
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
user332490 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f300863%2fusing-so-isnt-or-so-cant-instead-of-so-is-or-so-can%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
IqeIMw,mwH
1
I live in south-western Canada and have never heard this.
– Anonym
Jan 19 '16 at 13:43
1
If I heard that exchange, I would take it that the speaker was assuming (or suggesting) a negative response and agreeing with it. In the first example he assumes you can't touch the rim, and agrees with it. And in example two he assumes that Dave isn't feeling sick and responds that Mark too isn't sick.
– Roaring Fish
Jan 19 '16 at 13:53
1
For the record, I've never heard this construct before, and I would be totally confused upon hearing it. (North Carolina born and raised, but have lived other places.)
– Tim Ward
Jan 19 '16 at 16:06
Yeah, I've never heard this kind of construction and would be confused as to its meaning (and would likely suspect that the speakers were not native English speakers). I've lived several places in the Midwest and a bit in New Jersey.
– Hot Licks
Jan 21 '16 at 22:35
I just heard my mother-in-law use this, standing in her kitchen right now. Speaker A: "Yeah, Jim is coming because he wants to win the beer basket!" Mother-in-law: "Oh I know, so doesn't Dan!"
– Trevor D
Jan 23 '16 at 20:50