 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2010either side, both sides
"Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) context: "I" and Marino is working on a dead body on the autopsy table. And directing Marino to hold the body. qeustion: about usasge of "either" "Hold him on either side" could be said "Hold him on both sides, as meaning equivalent contents? It seems that either side and both sides are quite equivalent in this case, so interchangeable. What do you think? > "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. > (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > so interchangeable. > What do you think? I think you're right; either side and both sides are equivalent here. >> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I think you're right; either side and both sides are equivalent here. I disagree. Marino is being told to hold him on one side or the other (to stop him rolling off the table, presumably); holding him on both sides is unnecessary and would also mean that Marino might be in the way when the dissection begins.  SignatureLes (BrE) Very interesting. Here are two different interpretations given so far. And either side has two definitions in dictionaries I see. 1) both sides 2) one side or the other This makes for two different interpreations on the sentence I questioned. What I concluded is it depends upon context, its being interpreted either way. My grammer textbook lists the following example 1) Trees are on either side of the street. 2) Trees are on both sides of the street. 3) Trees are each side of the street. These are basically equivalent except for suble differences in nuance. > Very interesting. Here are two different interpretations given so far. > > And either side has two definitions in dictionaries I see. 1) both sides > 2) one side or the other . . . . True. It is a regrettable but inescapable fact that such ambivalence exists in this case, and yes, you are correct, only context can help when one encounters it. Obviously, in one's own writing and speaking, "either" for "both" should be avoided like the plague. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ "Masa": > Very interesting. Here are two different interpretations given so > far. That's only because Leslie was wrong. "Either side" *can* mean "one side or the other", but not in that sentence. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "Pleasant dreams!" msb@vex.net | "I'll dream of Canada." -- THE SUSPECT >>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >unnecessary and would also mean that Marino might be in the way when the >dissection begins. A lot depends on what is meant by "hold". If it means "grasp" then presumably holding on one side would be adequate. If it refers to placing an open hand on the body then "Hold him on either side" could be an instruction to steady the body with a hand on each side, perhaps with the palms vertical-ish. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > on both sides is unnecessary and would also mean that Marino might > be in the way when the dissection begins. My (AmE) judgement goes with "both". If I meant the other, I'd go with something like "Hold him on whichever side you want" or "Hold him on one side or the other" or "Hold him on either the left side or the right". Otherwise "on either side" essentially means "one on each side". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It's like grasping the difference 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |between what one usually considers Palo Alto, CA 94304 |a 'difficult' problem, and what |*is* a difficult problem. The day kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |one understands *why* counting all (650)857-7572 |the molecules in the Universe isn't |difficult...there's the leap. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Tina Marie Holmboe > My (AmE) judgement goes with "both". My (BrE) judgement agrees with yours. >> My (AmE) judgement goes with "both". > > My (BrE) judgement agrees with yours. Mine too. Signatureathel >>>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > right". Otherwise "on either side" essentially means "one on each > side". In the sentence cited in the OP, the intended meaning would be conveyed by emphasis. Emphasis on "either" with a slightly higher pitch than for "side" would mean "one side or the other"; equal emphasis and pitch for "either" and "side" would mean "both sides". So I retract my original absolutist stance. However, from a practical point of view, I still think holding the body on one side would cause less obstruction to the impending Fleischhauerei. SignatureLes (BrE) 1) Trees are on either side of the street In this case, it means that trees are on both sides of the street, and not the other interpretation possible? Could it mean that trees are on one or the other of the sides of the street by "Trees are on either side of the street"? Maybe no room for that interpretation, I guess.. Masa filted: >1) Trees are on either side of the street > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Maybe no room for that interpretation, I guess.. Maybe, but I'm not entirely sure...it's less ambiguous when you have something more distinctive than just "trees": "Every half-mile along the boulevard you could find a Starbucks on either side of the street." Each Starbucks is on one side or the other, but if you travel the entire boulevard you're certain to see them on both sides.... I wonder if "either" for "both" originally comes from a defective un-negation of the negated sense: "There are no drugstores on either side of this street." ....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >1) Trees are on either side of the street > >In this case, it means that trees are on both sides of the street, >and not the other interpretation possible? >Could it mean that trees are on one or the other of the sides of the >street >by "Trees are on either side of the street"? > >Maybe no room for that interpretation, I guess.. Nope. Trees on both sides. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > or the right". Otherwise "on either side" essentially means "one > on each side". I thought the opposite, but this snippet from Google Books says you're right. '"Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. "Good. Just like that." Marino grips either side of the dead man's head, trying to hold it still as I work a ....'. Masa must have had the context in front of him when he asked the question. It seems to me that the more straightforward a question is, the better the answer will be. > >> sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > - 引用テキストを表示 - Yes, but here I've learned that the meaning of either side could be decided by context, that's new to me. Because i had assumed from what is said in my grammar textbook that either side is always equivalent to both sides, whatever the context. This shows that limited context gives us useful information sometimes. >> [ ... ]– >> Masa must have had the context in front of him when he asked the >> question. It seems to me that the more straightforward a question is, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > both sides, whatever the context. > This shows that limited context gives us useful information sometimes. If you hang around a lot here you'll find that people nearly always want more context than questioners think necessary. Signatureathel >>>> sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > This shows that limited context gives us useful information > sometimes. I understand why you wanted to keep us in the dark. My point was that you would have gotten the same information if you had given us the next sentence and then asked if the words in isolation could also have meant "one or other", while we wouldn't have wasted time and space in guessing. You might even have gotten more complete responses. In this case, the context forces one interpretation, but I don't agree that the use of "either" in that sense, in the context you gave us (an imperative construction), is the best English. Certainly, if I were saying it, I would say something like "Hold both sides of his (or 'the') head," or "Hold (it on) both sides." Please don't take this response as hostile. I enjoy many of your questions, and hope to see more of them. As Athel says, though, we need all the relevant context you can conveniently supply. > > sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > - Show quoted text - "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. >> My (AmE) judgement goes with "both". If I meant the other, I'd go >> with something like "Hold him on whichever side you want" or "Hold [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to > mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. Actually, looking at the OED, the oldest sense, going back to the end of the ninth century, is "Each of the two". "One or other of the two" is cited back to the beginning of the fourteenth century. So the one you don't like is some four hundred years older than the one you do. Oh, this is fascinating. Apparently, in Middle English, "either" meant "both", and "outher" meant one or the other, and around the beginning of the fourteenth century "either" started moving into "outher" territory, by the end of the fifteenth century essentially having driven the latter out except in Scottish and Northern English regional dialects. I had not known that. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |To find the end of Middle English, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |you discover the exact date and Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time the Great Vowel Shift took |place (the morning of May 5, 1450, kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |at some time between neenuh fiftehn (650)857-7572 |and nahyn twenty-fahyv). | Kevin Wald http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> My (AmE) judgement goes with "both". If I meant the other, I'd go >>> with something like "Hold him on whichever side you want" or "Hold [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I had not known that. Neither had I, thank you. Regards, Ekkehard > "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to > mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. Really? Sounds perfectly normal to me. Here's a headline from the Da*ly M*i*: - ... twins brought up on either side of the Iron Curtain SignatureDavid >> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - ... twins brought up on either side of the Iron Curtain That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of the Iron Curtain. SignatureJames >>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of the > Iron Curtain. It doesn't? I would have read it to refer to a set (or sets) of twins in which one was brought up on one side and the other on the other? What is the story about? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The bathwater, in this case, does 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |not appear to ever have contained Palo Alto, CA 94304 |any baby. | kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | ronniecat (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >It doesn't? I would have read it to refer to a set (or sets) of twins >in which one was brought up on one side and the other on the other? So would I, but not that each twin was brought up on both sides. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>>>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > So would I, but not that each twin was brought up on both sides. Okay. I'd say that "either" doesn't really mean "both"; the OED defines it as "each of the two". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Theories are not matters of fact, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |they are derived from observing Palo Alto, CA 94304 |fact. If you don't have data, you |don't get good theories. You get kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |theology instead. (650)857-7572 | --John Lawler http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>>>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of >>>>>> "either" to mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Okay. I'd say that "either" doesn't really mean "both"; the OED > defines it as "each of the two". The OED also says that the OE and early ME word appears only in its original sense 'each of two', or as adv. = 'both'; but about the beginning of 14th c. it assumed the disjunctive sense 'one or the other of two' which properly belonged to /outher/. This disjunctive sense has so far prevailed that in mod.Eng. such expressions as /on either side/ = 'on both sides' are felt to be somewhat archaic, and must often be avoided on account of their ambiguity. SignatureJames >> Okay. I'd say that "either" doesn't really mean "both"; the OED >> defines it as "each of the two". [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 'on both sides' are felt to be somewhat archaic, and must often be > avoided on account of their ambiguity. So they do. I don't think that that feeling or the avoidance are really present in AmE. "On either side", meaning "flanking", is perfectly common, to the extent that, as I said upthread, I would say it differently if what I meant was "a choice between one or the other, but not both". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The great thing about Microsoft 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |dominating the world is that Palo Alto, CA 94304 |there's no shortage of support |opportunities. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Sam Alvis (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > in which one was brought up on one side and the other on the other? > What is the story about? While the sentence does not say that, it would be the logical conclusion, based on the fact that otherwise there would be no mention of the sides of the Iron Curtain. Which side would we have picked when asked to pick either side? Our side, of course. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of >>>> "either" to mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > twins in which one was brought up on one side and the other on the > other? Me too, but in that case I don't think you would say that a set of twins was brought up on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Cece objected to the use of "either" to mean "both". David quoted a use of "either" where I don't think it would make sense to use "both". I therefore suspect that David's example is not one that Cece would object to. SignatureJames >>>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of >>>>> "either" to mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > of "either" where I don't think it would make sense to use "both". I > therefore suspect that David's example is not one that Cece would object to. Interesting. We shall see. SignatureDavid > > That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of the > > Iron Curtain. > > It doesn't? I would have read it to refer to a set (or sets) of twins > in which one was brought up on one side and the other on the other? > What is the story about? Google on "twins brought up on either side of the Iron Curtain" and you'll get articles. Two young women who reunited at age 26. (That would be in 1995 -- not news now.) SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >>> That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of >>> the Iron Curtain. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > you'll get articles. Two young women who reunited at age 26. (That > would be in 1995 -- not news now.) Wouldn't "on opposite sides" have been a better choice of words? Just sayin'. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of the > Iron Curtain. Well, it does, but only for one meaning of your sentence. It could mean they were split and brought up one on each side, or it could mean that they were both brought up on both sides. SignatureDavid >>>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > mean they were split and brought up one on each side, or it could mean > that they were both brought up on both sides. I don't seem to be able to get the latter reading. My "either" wants to have both sides involved at the same time. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |"You can't prove it *isn't* so!" is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |as good as Q.E.D. in folk logic--as Palo Alto, CA 94304 |though it were necessary to submit |a piece of the moon to chemical kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |analysis before you could be sure (650)857-7572 |that it was not made of green |cheese. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Bergen Evans > >> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to > >> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That doesn't mean that the twins were brought up on both sides of the > Iron Curtain. Sure it does! One was brought up on the one side, and the other one was brought up on the other side. That's both sides, if you ask me! Jim "pick it to death" Deutch (JimboCat) -- "There is a knocking without, he said." "Without what?" said the Fool. "Without the door, idiot." The Fool gave him a worried look. "A knocking without a door?" he said suspiciously. "This isn't some kind of Zen, is it?" -- Terry Pratchett, /Wyrd Sisters/ > > "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to > > mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - ... twins brought up on either side of the Iron Curtain That sounds like a good example of Cece's "this or that, not both." I assume the newspaper mean separated twins -- one twin on one side of the Iron Curtain and the other twin on the other, neither having the experience of living on both sides. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >>> "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >>> mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Iron Curtain and the other twin on the other, neither having the > experience of living on both sides. Agreed, but that's exactly what "either side" means to me. You can't simultaneously be on either side, but a pair of people can. How about: - The man had bodyguards on either side. That is: he had at least two bodyguards, some of whom were on his left and some on his right. SignatureDavid >> > "Either" used to mean "this or that, not both." Use of "either" to >> > mean "both" drives me as nuts as "between each" does. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Iron Curtain and the other twin on the other, neither having the > experience of living on both sides. I think it depends on whether you construe "twins brought up on either side" to be referring individually to each twin or to the pair construed together as a group. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |When all else fails, give the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |customer what they ask for. This Palo Alto, CA 94304 |is strong medicine and rarely needs |to be repeated. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >unnecessary and would also mean that Marino might be in the way when the >dissection begins. I disagree. It *could* mean one side or the either, if Marino had just asked which side to hold him, but normally it would mean both sides. If I have a pencil in either hand, I have two pencils. Katy >>>> "Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >>>> (The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > which side to hold him, but normally it would mean both sides. If I have > a pencil in either hand, I have two pencils. Your "one side or the either" is an interesting construction, but not one that Masa should imitate. SignatureJames >> I disagree. It *could* mean one side or the either, if Marino had just asked >> which side to hold him, but normally it would mean both sides. If I have >> a pencil in either hand, I have two pencils. > >Your "one side or the either" is an interesting construction, but not >one that Masa should imitate. Indeed. I wouldn't even rate it as interesting, just incompetent. Katy > I disagree. Marino is being told to hold him on one side or the other (to > stop him rolling off the table, presumably); holding him on both sides is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > -- > Les (BrE) I agree with your interp. Sounds like an option's being offered. > > I disagree. Marino is being told to hold him on one side or the > > other (to stop him rolling off the table, presumably); holding him > > on both sides is unnecessary and would also mean that Marino might > > be in the way when the dissection begins. > I agree with your interp. Sounds like an option's being offered. As mentioned in the other follow-ups, that's not what the author meant. Brian SignatureDay 368 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >"Hold him on either side," I direct Marino. >(The Last Precinct, by P.Cornwell) [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >so interchangeable. >What do you think? In this case, yes. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.