Yes, we have no bananas - Page 3

Delvo · 22nd March 2022, 11:42 PM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

German has it easier with the word "doch".

English once had two separate pairs of "yes/no"-type words, one for positive questions and one for negative questions. The other pair was "yay/nay", which has fallen out of use in that form as question-answering words except for when legislatures record their official votes, because legislatures love to (sometimes) pretend it's still a few hundred years ago (or try to and get it wrong). In speech that isn't quoting a law book, they've evolved into the modern "yah" and "nah" but they don't mean something distinct from "yes/no" anymore. ("Yay" also still sort-of exists as an exclamation.)

Originally Posted by bruto

It also, coincidentally, is about the growing shortage of bananas owing to the periodic blights that cause the massive dieoff of cloned fruits, which ultimately led to a change in the breed of bananas we now get.

...which is also now threatened by a relative of the same blight that eliminated the previous kind of banana (although it's been that way for years and we've managed to keep putting off the bananageddon so far).

Originally Posted by Puppycow

By the way, my answer was that it might be ambiguous

So whether or not it it's ambiguous is ambiguous!

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Is there an objectively correct interpretation or is it actually ambiguous?

It's not inherently ambiguous, but there's a particular type of logical error which is so common that the error is so likely to occur that it's as if it were ambiguous anyway. Misinterpreting/misunderstanding/mis-hearing by not noticing a negative is so common that there's a standard bit of public-relations & public-speaking advice to avoid negatives even in statements, not just in questions. Otherwise, when you do include a negative and everybody in your audience hears it clearly, some measurable & significant portion of them will still think they heard the same statement minus the negative anyway. Negatives are the most likely words (and prefixes) to disappear from people's minds even when they catch all the rest of the same sentence. And I think to some extent we all know that, even if only informally, which in turn causes us to wonder if it's happened even in cases where it didn't.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Well, it helps if remember that the language at every step in history is whatever funky phrasings were meme-worthy in the past. People started repeating the funny/cute/whatever phrasing, until it became the new normal. So, yes, it's no real surprise...

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

I'm even seeing it in real time, live unplugged in Germany at the moment...

...basically when in Idiocracy the narrator says, "But the English language had deteriorated into a hybrid of hillbilly, valley girl, inner city slang, and various grunts." Yeah, no...

That apparent self-contradiction at the end is a change I've been noticing in English lately. I never heard it at all before about a decade ago, and now it's ubiquitous.

I understand that people who say it are essentially thinking of the two words as addressing two different subjects ("yes, I heard & understood & acknowledge* what was just said, but no, I don't agree with it"), but the juxtaposition (with nothing else between them to indicate the change in subject) is so jarring that I really don't get how anybody could have ever gotten started doing it, or why nobody else ever mentions how bizarre the juxtaposition sounds.

Another jarring thing I've been hearing over about the last decade, about which I don't get how anybody ever got started on it or why nobody else ever seems to point out how bizarre it is: person 1 explains what (s)he thinks about something and then person 2 uses "no" for agreement

when person 2 is about to add more reasons for the same conclusion. I suppose it must have originated as a negative response to something else which person 2 thinks person 1 might be thinking but hasn't said yet, such as that person 1 is awaiting/expecting a disagreement, or that person 1 thinks the reasons (s)he gave are all there are... so the agreeing "no" is essentially "no, I don't disagree" or "no, those aren't the only reasons to think that"... but the bottom line is that, if person 1 didn't say such a thing, and person 2 doesn't elaborate on it, it still ends up just being a "no" in agreement.

(I'm not sure I've ever encountered this one from anybody who isn't Californian.)

* "Heard, understood, & acknowledged/affirmed" also gives us "HUA", which is used in the American army both as an answer and as a question to which "HUA" is the expected answer. If you've heard it in movies, you might have mistaken it for a non-yelled version of a generic yell of "Hooo-aaah!". Or maybe that was where it started and then somebody retrofitted "HUA" later.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Some prefer to know cucumbers

So... are you not saying scale doesn't matter?

JayUtah · 31st March 2022, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

A lot of the yes/no ambiguity can be avoided by phrasing a question in the positive sense: "Is there an exclusive relationship"?

It's when you use a negated statement that your answer risks the dreaded double negative.

Yeah, this. My impression is that questions were more commonly phrased as negatives in, say, the Victorian era and earlier. Hence I don't think there would have been as much confusion then -- since it was common practice -- as there is today.

theprestige · 31st March 2022, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by Delvo

I understand that people who say it are essentially thinking of the two words as addressing two different subjects ("yes, I heard & understood & acknowledge* what was just said, but no, I don't agree with it"), but the juxtaposition (with nothing else between them to indicate the change in subject) is so jarring that I really don't get how anybody could have ever gotten started doing it, or why nobody else ever mentions how bizarre the juxtaposition sounds.

I wonder if it came about because it's somewhat jarring. Similar to sarcasm, which at face value makes no semantic sense. "Wait, you're saying the opposite of what you mean, and I'm supposed to read your real meaning from your tone of voice? And it's supposed to work in writing, too? Boop to that!"

Or irony. "So you're saying there's a second, contradictory or conflicting meaning to what you're saying, and I'm just supposed to pick up on it? And maybe there's a tone of voice cue, but maybe not, and if there is I shouldn't confuse it with sarcasm? Boop to that!"

Sometimes people make up more complicated or counter-intuitive ways to say something for emphasis or humor or just for fun. I am fond of saying, "the world is a vampire". Which is pretty true, as metaphors go. Inescapable entropy and all that. But sometimes, as a change of pace, I will say, "the world is exhibiting certain blood-sucking tendencies today." Same thing, basically, but takes an extra moment or two to unpack. Always gets a laugh out of Ms theprestige, though.

I think it's the taking-an-extra-moment-to-unpack is what gives "yeah, no" its appeal.

bignickel · 26th April 2022, 01:06 PM

Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes".

My wife sometime tries to dissuade my from said usage of the word, on the reasoning that most American's aren't familiar with it. I think the more it gets used here, the more people will get familiar with it. So I keep using it.

I should try and work "chigau" for common English "no" more into my speech. (Chigau meaning 'incorrect/wrong', at least as was explained to me by a Japanese person). At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough.

theprestige · 26th April 2022, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by bignickel

Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes".

My wife sometime tries to dissuade my from said usage of the word, on the reasoning that most American's aren't familiar with it. I think the more it gets used here, the more people will get familiar with it. So I keep using it.

Won't do us Americans much good if we don't get the more precise connotations you value it for.

For which you value it.

Quote:

I should try and work "chigau" for common English "no" more into my speech. (Chigau meaning 'incorrect/wrong', at least as was explained to me by a Japanese person). At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough.

I mean...

Okay, look: If someone asks a binary question of fact, you're not going to reply with "incorrect".[indent]"Is it raining outside?"

"Incorrect."[/quote]

See? It doesn't make sense and just sounds rude.

On the other hand, if someone makes an (incorrect) statement of fact, then "incorrect" is semantically appropriate (but dubious in terms of etiquette).

bignickel · 27th April 2022, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Okay, look: If someone asks a binary question of fact, you're not going to reply with "incorrect".[indent]"Is it raining outside?"

"Incorrect."

See? It doesn't make sense and just sounds rude.

From my post:

Quote:

At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough.

As I say I'd like to bring 'chigau' in, I don't that will practically happen. I've tried a few time to bring "23 skidoo!" back, but I keep forgetting to use it. Maybe I should go with "F.A.B.!"

arthwollipot · 27th April 2022, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by bignickel

Maybe I should go with "F.A.B.!"

Good choice, though personally I prefer "Spectrum is green!"

Puppycow · 2nd May 2022, 09:14 PM

Originally Posted by bignickel

Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes".

I've been living in Japan for over 20 years now, and I'm struggling to think of what the difference is between "hai" and "yes". Is there a difference?

Darat · 3rd May 2022, 04:04 AM

Originally Posted by JayUtah

Yeah, this. My impression is that questions were more commonly phrased as negatives in, say, the Victorian era and earlier. Hence I don't think there would have been as much confusion then -- since it was common practice -- as there is today.

Never thought about this. Is it a British v American difference? I'm even now wondering if it is a dialect difference within Britain, growing up it was and back home it still is very common, but thinking about it not as a common around where I live at the moment. Interesting.

Little snippet of a foreigner struggling with negative questions

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Puppycow · 3rd May 2022, 04:50 AM

I do feel like the rule changes depending on whether it's a casual conversation and if it's written down though. Like a flow chart.

dann · 8th May 2022, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

Little snippet of a foreigner struggling with negative questions

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

"'Aren't you going out tonight?' is the same as 'Are you going out tonight?'"
That's also how we respond in Danish: 'Yes, I am,' if I am going out. 'No, I'm not,' if I'm not going out.

22nd March 2022, 11:42 PM	#81
Delvo Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: North Tonawanda, NY Posts: 10,347	Originally Posted by HansMustermann German has it easier with the word "doch". English once had two separate pairs of "yes/no"-type words, one for positive questions and one for negative questions. The other pair was "yay/nay", which has fallen out of use in that form as question-answering words except for when legislatures record their official votes, because legislatures love to (sometimes) pretend it's still a few hundred years ago (or try to and get it wrong). In speech that isn't quoting a law book, they've evolved into the modern "yah" and "nah" but they don't mean something distinct from "yes/no" anymore. ("Yay" also still sort-of exists as an exclamation.) Originally Posted by bruto It also, coincidentally, is about the growing shortage of bananas owing to the periodic blights that cause the massive dieoff of cloned fruits, which ultimately led to a change in the breed of bananas we now get. ...which is also now threatened by a relative of the same blight that eliminated the previous kind of banana (although it's been that way for years and we've managed to keep putting off the bananageddon so far). Originally Posted by Puppycow By the way, my answer was that it might be ambiguous So whether or not it it's ambiguous is ambiguous! Originally Posted by Puppycow Is there an objectively correct interpretation or is it actually ambiguous? It's not inherently ambiguous, but there's a particular type of logical error which is so common that the error is so likely to occur that it's as if it were ambiguous anyway. Misinterpreting/misunderstanding/mis-hearing by not noticing a negative is so common that there's a standard bit of public-relations & public-speaking advice to avoid negatives even in statements, not just in questions. Otherwise, when you do include a negative and everybody in your audience hears it clearly, some measurable & significant portion of them will still think they heard the same statement minus the negative anyway. Negatives are the most likely words (and prefixes) to disappear from people's minds even when they catch all the rest of the same sentence. And I think to some extent we all know that, even if only informally, which in turn causes us to wonder if it's happened even in cases where it didn't. Originally Posted by HansMustermann Well, it helps if remember that the language at every step in history is whatever funky phrasings were meme-worthy in the past. People started repeating the funny/cute/whatever phrasing, until it became the new normal. So, *yes, it's no real surprise... Originally Posted by HansMustermann* I'm even seeing it in real time, live unplugged in Germany at the moment... ...basically when in Idiocracy the narrator says, "But the English language had deteriorated into a hybrid of hillbilly, valley girl, inner city slang, and various grunts." *Yeah, no... That apparent self-contradiction at the end is a change I've been noticing in English lately. I never heard it at all before about a decade ago, and now it's ubiquitous. I understand that people who say it are essentially thinking of the two words as addressing two different subjects ("yes, I heard & understood & acknowledge* what was just said, but no, I don't agree with it"), but the juxtaposition (with nothing else between them to indicate the change in subject) is so jarring that I really don't get how anybody could have ever gotten started doing it, or why nobody else ever mentions how bizarre the juxtaposition sounds. Another jarring thing I've been hearing over about the last decade, about which I don't get how anybody ever got started on it or why nobody else ever seems to point out how bizarre it is: person 1 explains what (s)he thinks about something and then person 2 uses "no" for agreement* when person 2 is about to add more reasons for the same conclusion. I suppose it must have originated as a negative response to something else which person 2 thinks person 1 might be thinking but hasn't said yet, such as that person 1 is awaiting/expecting a disagreement, or that person 1 thinks the reasons (s)he gave are all there are... so the agreeing "no" is essentially "no, I don't disagree" or "no, those aren't the only reasons to think that"... but the bottom line is that, if person 1 didn't say such a thing, and person 2 doesn't elaborate on it, it still ends up just being a "no" in agreement. (I'm not sure I've ever encountered this one from anybody who isn't Californian.) * "Heard, understood, & acknowledged/affirmed" also gives us "HUA", which is used in the American army both as an answer and as a question to which "HUA" is the expected answer. If you've heard it in movies, you might have mistaken it for a non-yelled version of a generic yell of "Hooo-aaah!". Or maybe that was where it started and then somebody retrofitted "HUA" later. Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Some prefer to know cucumbers So... are you not saying scale doesn't matter?
	Last edited by Delvo; 22nd March 2022 at 11:45 PM.

31st March 2022, 07:42 AM	#83
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 59,420	On the origins of "yeah, no." Originally Posted by Delvo I understand that people who say it are essentially thinking of the two words as addressing two different subjects ("yes, I heard & understood & acknowledge* what was just said, but no, I don't agree with it"), but the juxtaposition (with nothing else between them to indicate the change in subject) is so jarring that I really don't get how anybody could have ever gotten started doing it, or why nobody else ever mentions how bizarre the juxtaposition sounds. I wonder if it came about because it's somewhat jarring. Similar to sarcasm, which at face value makes no semantic sense. "Wait, you're saying the opposite of what you mean, and I'm supposed to read your real meaning from your tone of voice? And it's supposed to work in writing, too? Boop to that!" Or irony. "So you're saying there's a second, contradictory or conflicting meaning to what you're saying, and I'm just supposed to pick up on it? And maybe there's a tone of voice cue, but maybe not, and if there is I shouldn't confuse it with sarcasm? Boop to that!" Sometimes people make up more complicated or counter-intuitive ways to say something for emphasis or humor or just for fun. I am fond of saying, "the world is a vampire". Which is pretty true, as metaphors go. Inescapable entropy and all that. But sometimes, as a change of pace, I will say, "the world is exhibiting certain blood-sucking tendencies today." Same thing, basically, but takes an extra moment or two to unpack. Always gets a laugh out of Ms theprestige, though. I think it's the taking-an-extra-moment-to-unpack is what gives "yeah, no" its appeal.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division. Last edited by theprestige; 31st March 2022 at 07:43 AM.

26th April 2022, 01:06 PM	#84
bignickel Mad Mod Poet God Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 3,257	Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes". My wife sometime tries to dissuade my from said usage of the word, on the reasoning that most American's aren't familiar with it. I think the more it gets used here, the more people will get familiar with it. So I keep using it. I should try and work "chigau" for common English "no" more into my speech. (Chigau meaning 'incorrect/wrong', at least as was explained to me by a Japanese person). At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough.
	__________________ "You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real. I think I have the responsibility to clear things up to unmask the cheap lies contained in books like that." - Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone Last edited by bignickel; 26th April 2022 at 01:08 PM. Reason: more stuff

26th April 2022, 01:23 PM	#85
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 59,420	Originally Posted by bignickel Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes". My wife sometime tries to dissuade my from said usage of the word, on the reasoning that most American's aren't familiar with it. I think the more it gets used here, the more people will get familiar with it. So I keep using it. Won't do us Americans much good if we don't get the more precise connotations you value it for. For which you value it. Quote: I should try and work "chigau" for common English "no" more into my speech. (Chigau meaning 'incorrect/wrong', at least as was explained to me by a Japanese person). At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough. I mean... Okay, look: If someone asks a binary question of fact, you're not going to reply with "incorrect".[indent]"Is it raining outside?" "Incorrect."[/quote] See? It doesn't make sense and just sounds rude. On the other hand, if someone makes an (incorrect) statement of fact, then "incorrect" is semantically appropriate (but dubious in terms of etiquette).
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

27th April 2022, 08:05 AM	#86
bignickel Mad Mod Poet God Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 3,257	Originally Posted by theprestige Okay, look: If someone asks a binary question of fact, you're not going to reply with "incorrect".[indent]"Is it raining outside?" "Incorrect." See? It doesn't make sense and just sounds rude. From my post: Quote: At least for such occasions when I believe the question to be incorrect/wrong. I figure for "is it raining outside?", 'no' should be good enough. As I say I'd like to bring 'chigau' in, I don't that will practically happen. I've tried a few time to bring "23 skidoo!" back, but I keep forgetting to use it. Maybe I should go with "F.A.B.!"
	__________________ "You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real. I think I have the responsibility to clear things up to unmask the cheap lies contained in books like that." - Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone Last edited by bignickel; 27th April 2022 at 08:10 AM. Reason: the editor is mangling the post

31st March 2022, 07:22 AM	#82
JayUtah Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: The great American West Posts: 21,737	Originally Posted by psionl0 A lot of the yes/no ambiguity can be avoided by phrasing a question in the positive sense: "Is there an exclusive relationship"? It's when you use a negated statement that your answer risks the dreaded double negative. Yeah, this. My impression is that questions were more commonly phrased as negatives in, say, the Victorian era and earlier. Hence I don't think there would have been as much confusion then -- since it was common practice -- as there is today.

27th April 2022, 08:27 PM	#87
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 76,840	Originally Posted by bignickel Maybe I should go with "F.A.B.!" Good choice, though personally I prefer "Spectrum is green!"
	__________________ Слава Україні Героям слава

2nd May 2022, 09:14 PM	#88
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 27,089	Originally Posted by bignickel Since living in Japan for about 1.5 years some time ago, I've taken to using "hai" instead of "yes", because I find it's Japanese meaning more precise then English "yes". I've been living in Japan for over 20 years now, and I'm struggling to think of what the difference is between "hai" and "yes". Is there a difference?
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

3rd May 2022, 04:50 AM	#90
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 27,089	I do feel like the rule changes depending on whether it's a casual conversation and if it's written down though. Like a flow chart.
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare