Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

O'Connor: ought

54 views
Skip to first unread message

Marius Hancu

unread,
Feb 3, 2011, 8:56:45 AM2/3/11
to
Hello:

I take "ought" to be "zero" here but why is it necessary for 1919?

--
“It was a head-doctor at the penitentiary said what I had done was
kill my daddy but I known that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen
ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with
it.

Flannery O'Connor
A Good Man Is Hard to Find
--
Thanks.
Marius Hancu

Peter Duncanson (BrE)

unread,
Feb 3, 2011, 10:03:42 AM2/3/11
to
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 05:56:45 -0800 (PST), Marius Hancu
<marius...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hello:
>
>I take "ought" to be "zero" here but why is it necessary for 1919?
>

It isn't. Perhaps it was customary as a continuation of the series
"nineteen ought one" ... "nineteen ought nine" with "ought" being
thought of not as a numerical digit but just as something that goes
between the two parts of year in speech.

>--
>“It was a head-doctor at the penitentiary said what I had done was
>kill my daddy but I known that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen
>ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with
>it.
>
>Flannery O'Connor
>A Good Man Is Hard to Find

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

Horace LaBadie

unread,
Feb 3, 2011, 10:22:51 AM2/3/11
to
In article
<7f147767-aa4c-4925...@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
Marius Hancu <marius...@gmail.com> wrote:

It's a regionalism, verging on backwoods dialect. The author uses it to
signify the untutored nature of the speaker.

Marius Hancu

unread,
Feb 3, 2011, 10:42:53 AM2/3/11
to
On Feb 3, 10:22 am, Horace LaBadie <hwlabadi...@nospam.highstream.net>
wrote:

> > I take "ought" to be "zero" here but why is it necessary for 1919?
>
> > --
> > It was a head-doctor at the penitentiary said what I had done was
> > kill my daddy but I known that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen
> > ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with
> > it.
>

>


> It's a regionalism, verging on backwoods dialect. The author uses it to
> signify the untutored nature of the speaker.

Thank you both.
Marius Hancu

Jerry Friedman

unread,
Feb 3, 2011, 1:38:29 PM2/3/11
to
On Feb 3, 8:03 am, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 05:56:45 -0800 (PST), Marius Hancu
>
> <marius.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Hello:
>
> >I take "ought" to be "zero" here but why is it necessary for 1919?
>
> It isn't. Perhaps it was customary as a continuation of the series
> "nineteen ought one" ... "nineteen ought nine" with "ought" being
> thought of not as a numerical digit but just as something that goes
> between the two parts of year in speech.

As in the recent thread on "oh-ten".

> >--
> >“It was a head-doctor at the penitentiary  said what I had done was
> >kill my daddy but I known  that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen
> >ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with
> >it.
>
> >Flannery O'Connor
> >A Good Man Is Hard to Find

--
Jerry Friedman

0 new messages