Re: Another think coming

[Sarah Mahoney <smahoney -at- U -dot- WASHINGTON -dot- EDU>]

RE: Magazine Article With "Think" Version
All right, all right.  I surrender!  I have to admit that I wrote that
message BEFORE I read about all those people out there who accept the
"thing" version of the statement.  I had honestly NEVER in my life
heard the "thing" version, and so I thought it was a typo.  I realize
the error of my ways, and have become a much more open-minded person
as a result of this discussion!  The lesson I've learned: never
assume yours is the only way...

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sarah Mahoney, Alumni/Donor Information Systems    (206) 685-8979
University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA         (206) 685-8911 FAX
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On Mon, 31 Jan 1994, Charles P. Campbell wrote:

> Sarah Mahoney is in high dudgeon because some proofreader let "another think
> coming" appear in print in a magazine.  What was the full context, Sarah?

> I feel fairly sure that "think" is proper, if one hears the expression as I
> did: it occured as admonition to a misbehaving child.  "If you think you're
> going to get away with [supply venal or mortal sin here], young man, you've
> got another think coming."

> That's the only context I remember strongly hearing that expression in.  It's
> the "nouning" of _think_ that makes it memorable.

> Can those of you who favor _thing_ supply us explain more clearly the
 conditions
> under which the expression is used, or what "thing" is supposed to be coming?

> If we can't settle this question by May, I'm gibving up on it. :=>

> Chuck
> cpc -at- nmt -dot- edu