<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I Forgot to Go to the Store and Get Any</title>
	<atom:link href="http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/</link>
	<description>Linguistic commentary from a guy who takes things too literally</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 21:39:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-32029</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2012 04:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-32029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsaw Will</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-32024</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warsaw Will]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:49:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-32024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your post has inspired me to put together a lesson on my blog for advanced foreign learners:

http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2012/08/random-lesson-non-assertive-words-plus.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your post has inspired me to put together a lesson on my blog for advanced foreign learners:</p>
<p><a href="http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2012/08/random-lesson-non-assertive-words-plus.html" rel="nofollow">http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2012/08/random-lesson-non-assertive-words-plus.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsaw Will</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31941</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warsaw Will]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Aug 2012 09:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31941</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the reply, but I think your last example is a false analogy. Your original sentence was &#039;I forgot to go to the store and get any club soda.&#039; Get here is what? a bare infinitive? And that&#039;s what I&#039;m talking about - the construction - &#039;to go and do something&#039;. But your last example isn&#039;t about this construction - it has no infinitive, but two finite verbs. All it&#039;s doing is missing out the second &#039;I&#039; - &#039;I went to the store and (I) got some club soda&#039;. It&#039;s just two coordinate clauses linked with &#039;and&#039;. This really is a parallel structure.

I would only argue my point about &#039;and&#039; meaning (in order) to&#039; where &#039;and&#039; comes after a non-finite verb: an infinitive (as above), a gerund - &#039;She thought of going and getting him&#039;, or in an imperative - &#039;Come and look at this&#039;, &#039;Try and eat something&#039;, &#039;Wait and see&#039;. 

Once you start using finite verbs, I agree, things start to get complicated; it seems to depend on context. &#039;He often comes and sees us at the weekend&#039;, I think does imply purpose. But - &#039;She stayed and played with the children&#039; - we simply don&#039;t know whether it was her purpose to play with the children, or if it just happened that way. Personally, I would never argue this point where two past tenses are used in a parallel structure like this, the second verb simply describes an accomplished fact, not necessarily an intention.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reply, but I think your last example is a false analogy. Your original sentence was &#8216;I forgot to go to the store and get any club soda.&#8217; Get here is what? a bare infinitive? And that&#8217;s what I&#8217;m talking about &#8211; the construction &#8211; &#8216;to go and do something&#8217;. But your last example isn&#8217;t about this construction &#8211; it has no infinitive, but two finite verbs. All it&#8217;s doing is missing out the second &#8216;I&#8217; &#8211; &#8216;I went to the store and (I) got some club soda&#8217;. It&#8217;s just two coordinate clauses linked with &#8216;and&#8217;. This really is a parallel structure.</p>
<p>I would only argue my point about &#8216;and&#8217; meaning (in order) to&#8217; where &#8216;and&#8217; comes after a non-finite verb: an infinitive (as above), a gerund &#8211; &#8216;She thought of going and getting him&#8217;, or in an imperative &#8211; &#8216;Come and look at this&#8217;, &#8216;Try and eat something&#8217;, &#8216;Wait and see&#8217;. </p>
<p>Once you start using finite verbs, I agree, things start to get complicated; it seems to depend on context. &#8216;He often comes and sees us at the weekend&#8217;, I think does imply purpose. But &#8211; &#8216;She stayed and played with the children&#8217; &#8211; we simply don&#8217;t know whether it was her purpose to play with the children, or if it just happened that way. Personally, I would never argue this point where two past tenses are used in a parallel structure like this, the second verb simply describes an accomplished fact, not necessarily an intention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31940</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Aug 2012 04:04:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your analysis has been hit upon by others analysing these kinds of coordinations. The idea is appealing, because you can explain away the troublesome non-parallelism by saying, &quot;This &lt;I&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; isn&#039;t really a conjunction. It&#039;s a homonymous subordinator!&quot; However, this easy way out isn&#039;t actually so easy to take. Although in practical terms, &quot;forgot to go to do s.t.&quot; and &quot;forgot to go and do s.t.&quot; have the same meaning, the &lt;I&gt;to&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;I&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; start to behave differently when you poke them. For example, it&#039;s been noted that you can cancel the implicature that you actually accomplished what you set out to do when you say, &quot;I went to the store to get some club soda ... but they were all out.&quot; Try to do that with &lt;I&gt;and&lt;/i&gt;, and it doesn&#039;t work: &quot;I went to the store and got some club soda ... but they were all out.&quot; WTF? At this point, the &lt;I&gt;and&lt;/i&gt;=&lt;i&gt;to&lt;/i&gt; explanation will require enough additional stipulations to get the facts right that it loses its advantage over just saying that this is the same conjunction &lt;I&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; as any other time, and explaining the facts under that assumption.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your analysis has been hit upon by others analysing these kinds of coordinations. The idea is appealing, because you can explain away the troublesome non-parallelism by saying, &#8220;This <i>and</i> isn&#8217;t really a conjunction. It&#8217;s a homonymous subordinator!&#8221; However, this easy way out isn&#8217;t actually so easy to take. Although in practical terms, &#8220;forgot to go to do s.t.&#8221; and &#8220;forgot to go and do s.t.&#8221; have the same meaning, the <i>to</i> and <i>and</i> start to behave differently when you poke them. For example, it&#8217;s been noted that you can cancel the implicature that you actually accomplished what you set out to do when you say, &#8220;I went to the store to get some club soda &#8230; but they were all out.&#8221; Try to do that with <i>and</i>, and it doesn&#8217;t work: &#8220;I went to the store and got some club soda &#8230; but they were all out.&#8221; WTF? At this point, the <i>and</i>=<i>to</i> explanation will require enough additional stipulations to get the facts right that it loses its advantage over just saying that this is the same conjunction <i>and</i> as any other time, and explaining the facts under that assumption.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsaw Will</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31936</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warsaw Will]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 06:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31936</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For those (especially BrE speakers) who doubt the validity of &#039;forgot to get any&#039;, this is from Practical English Usage by Michael Swan, &#039;the&#039; bible for many British EFL teachers: 

&quot;We use &#039;any&#039; in affirmative clauses after words that have a negative or limiting meaning&quot;

And amongst his examples: &quot;I forgot to get any bread.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those (especially BrE speakers) who doubt the validity of &#8216;forgot to get any&#8217;, this is from Practical English Usage by Michael Swan, &#8216;the&#8217; bible for many British EFL teachers: </p>
<p>&#8220;We use &#8216;any&#8217; in affirmative clauses after words that have a negative or limiting meaning&#8221;</p>
<p>And amongst his examples: &#8220;I forgot to get any bread.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsaw Will</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31922</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warsaw Will]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 14:25:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31922</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve just had a thought. When we say &#039;I&#039;m going to go and do something&#039;, that &#039;and&#039; really means &#039;(in order) to&#039;. It&#039;s not really about two parallel activities or structures. If you substituted &#039;to&#039; for &#039;and&#039; in your sentence: &#039;I forgot to go the store to get any soda&#039;, I don&#039;t think it would work at all; we need to use &#039;some&#039;. Perhaps that&#039;s why I find &#039;any&#039; strange in your sentence, while having no problem with &#039;I forgot to get any soda&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve just had a thought. When we say &#8216;I&#8217;m going to go and do something&#8217;, that &#8216;and&#8217; really means &#8216;(in order) to&#8217;. It&#8217;s not really about two parallel activities or structures. If you substituted &#8216;to&#8217; for &#8216;and&#8217; in your sentence: &#8216;I forgot to go the store to get any soda&#8217;, I don&#8217;t think it would work at all; we need to use &#8216;some&#8217;. Perhaps that&#8217;s why I find &#8216;any&#8217; strange in your sentence, while having no problem with &#8216;I forgot to get any soda&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsaw Will</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31915</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warsaw Will]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:52:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For me, (BrE) - &#039;I forgot to get any soda&#039;, is perfectly OK and even sounds more natural than &#039;I forget to get some soda&#039;, so I have no problem with that aspect.

But the intervening &#039;go to the store and&#039; seems to change it for me. When I first read it, it did look a bit strange. I can see that logically &#039;forget&#039; applies to both verbs, but it doesn&#039;t quite work for me; perhaps the &#039;any&#039; is a bit too far removed from &#039;forget&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For me, (BrE) &#8211; &#8216;I forgot to get any soda&#8217;, is perfectly OK and even sounds more natural than &#8216;I forget to get some soda&#8217;, so I have no problem with that aspect.</p>
<p>But the intervening &#8216;go to the store and&#8217; seems to change it for me. When I first read it, it did look a bit strange. I can see that logically &#8216;forget&#8217; applies to both verbs, but it doesn&#8217;t quite work for me; perhaps the &#8216;any&#8217; is a bit too far removed from &#8216;forget&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31889</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2012 14:48:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31889</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Both of your options are also grammatical for me. However, &quot;forgot to * any&quot; seems to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/search?q=%22forgot+to+*+any%22&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8&amp;aq=t&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;client=firefox-a&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;well-attested&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both of your options are also grammatical for me. However, &#8220;forgot to * any&#8221; seems to be <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22forgot+to+*+any%22&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8&amp;aq=t&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;client=firefox-a" rel="nofollow">well-attested</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31888</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2012 14:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31888</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, what I said was grammatical for me, but unusual enough for me to notice it, especially since I&#039;ve been thinking about these kinds of unusual coordinations.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, what I said was grammatical for me, but unusual enough for me to notice it, especially since I&#8217;ve been thinking about these kinds of unusual coordinations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal</title>
		<link>http://literalminded.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/i-forgot-to-go-to-the-store-and-get-any/#comment-31887</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2012 14:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://literalminded.wordpress.com/?p=5160#comment-31887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You and Ellen are both right. In my enthusiasm for talking about NPIs, I forgot to mention a complication: In addition to its NPI usage, &lt;I&gt;any&lt;/i&gt; can also be used in the ways Thomas mentions. It&#039;s often called &quot;free choice &lt;I&gt;any&lt;/i&gt;&quot;. A lot has been written about it; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~dayal/UniversalFC.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; is a 2004 paper on it by Veneeta Dayal of Rutgers. I haven&#039;t read this paper, but it was on the first page of search results, and it&#039;s by a linguist who has written some other papers I&#039;ve read.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You and Ellen are both right. In my enthusiasm for talking about NPIs, I forgot to mention a complication: In addition to its NPI usage, <i>any</i> can also be used in the ways Thomas mentions. It&#8217;s often called &#8220;free choice <i>any</i>&#8220;. A lot has been written about it; <a href="http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~dayal/UniversalFC.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a> is a 2004 paper on it by Veneeta Dayal of Rutgers. I haven&#8217;t read this paper, but it was on the first page of search results, and it&#8217;s by a linguist who has written some other papers I&#8217;ve read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
