Is it ever okay to say "Lest We Not Forget" or is that obvious, illiterate and/or Redundant?

[bosod...@gmail.com]

When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence parsed with and without the qualification of also a "not"?

(See how I put it all in the subject line for you whiners with newsreaders hating on Google Groups!)

[David Kleinecke]

On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 8:49:15 AM UTC-7, bosod...@gmail.com wrote:
> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence parsed with and without the qualification of also a "not"?
>
> (See how I put it all in the subject line for you whiners with newsreaders hating on Google Groups!)

I don't think "lest" is used in contemporary English speech or writing.

But its demise was so recent that people will use it for an archaic
effect. It probably survives in some idioms.

That said - I think the placement of "not" is not grammatical. It should
be "Lest we do not forget" and it parses as
lest + SENTENCE.

[grabber]

That is not what I would have said. I would have said that "lest" is
followed by a subjunctive, and that "lest we not forget" is OK (though a
rather clumsy double negative) if we are talking about what's needed to
ensure that we do forget.

[David Kleinecke]

I don't think there is a subjunctive. The test is a third person
singular subject. I would say
Lest our nation fails to fulfill its destiny.
but I suppose some people would prefer a subjunctive
Lest our nation fail to fulfill its destiny.

The subjunctive is putting up a stiff resistance to eradication.

[Don Phillipson]

> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 8:49:15 AM UTC-7, bosod...@gmail.com wrote:
>> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence parsed
>> with and
>> without the qualification of also a "not"?

"David Kleinecke" <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4db69cb0-b190-4b10...@googlegroups.com...

> I don't think "lest" is used in contemporary English speech or writing.
>
> But its demise was so recent that people will use it for an archaic
> effect. It probably survives in some idioms.

"Lest we forget" (the refrain of one of Kipling's most famous
poems, about duty and the decline of empire) is very familiar.
in Britain and fairly well known to Americans. It was an archaism
when Kipling used it (1897) but British prose and speech styles
do not disfavour archaisms, so long as they are reasonably familiar.

English grammar has no rules for " how "lest' is supposed to be
used" in either affirmative or negative statements.

> . . . That said It should be "Lest we do not forget" and it parses as
> lest + SENTENCE.

Not so. Parsing requires us to identify the "part of speech" of
every word. Lest is a conjunction, most sources tell us, but
they then differ (e.g. as to whether it is a subordinating conjunction
or a relative conjunction.) Lest may be a rare or unique word
in its obliqueness to the usual rules: but it is by no means
either useless or obsolete.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[David Kleinecke]

On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 1:46:38 PM UTC-7, Don Phillipson wrote:

> Not so. Parsing requires us to identify the "part of speech" of
> every word. Lest is a conjunction, most sources tell us, but
> they then differ (e.g. as to whether it is a subordinating conjunction
> or a relative conjunction.) Lest may be a rare or unique word
> in its obliqueness to the usual rules: but it is by no means
> either useless or obsolete.

That is a very old fashioned notion of parsing. Those of us who dont
work with parts of speech cannot use such a definition. For example,
in a phrasal verb pattern such as "pick up X" we do not attempt to
assign a part of speech to each word and we view "pick up" as the
lexical atom.

I would describe "lest" as a discourse particle - but then I dont use
the concept of conjunction or subordinating or relative such.

[Peter Moylan]

On 2016-Mar-18 02:49, bosod...@gmail.com wrote:

> (See how I put it all in the subject line for you whiners with newsreaders hating on Google Groups!)

Hating on?

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[bosod...@gmail.com]

yeah, it be hip speak for hating sump'n dontcha know

[musika]

A sort of hip replacement.

--
Ray
UK

[Ross]

On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:49:15 AM UTC+13, bosod...@gmail.com wrote:
> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence parsed with and without the qualification of also a "not"?
>

Why would you want to? "Lest" means "so that...not"; "forget" means
"not remember". So in "Lest we not forget" you've got three negatives
stacked up -- almost certain to cause confusion.
There isn't any grammatical rule involved here -- just clarity of
expression.

[CDB]

For purposes of comprehension, you can think of "lest" as meaning "so
that ... not". "So that we do not forget." The extra "not", besides
making the phrasing look silly, would reverse the meaning to "so that we
do not *not* forget": so that we do not fail to forget, so that we do
not remember.

The word is old-fashioned and can be dispensed with if it gives you
problems. Some translations of one passsage in the Bible read "Judge
not, lest ye be judged." Others go "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

I'm surprised at this. It is my impression that "lest" is the last
remaining word that is _always_ followed by a subjunctive. (Peope who
don't know what a subjunctive is probably don't say "lest" at all.)

>
> The subjunctive is putting up a stiff resistance to eradication.

--
athel

[CDB]

On 17/03/2016 12:52 PM, David Kleinecke wrote:
> grabber wrote:

>> David Kleinecke wrote:
>>> bosod...@gmail.com wrote:

>>>> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a
>>>> sentence parsed with and without the qualification of also a
>>>> "not"?

>>>> (See how I put it all in the subject line for you whiners with
>>>> newsreaders hating on Google Groups!)

>>> I don't think "lest" is used in contemporary English speech or
>>> writing.

>>> But its demise was so recent that people will use it for an
>>> archaic effect. It probably survives in some idioms.

No doubt "Recessional" will be around for a while yet.

http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/176152

>>> That said - I think the placement of "not" is not grammatical.
>>> It should be "Lest we do not forget" and it parses as lest +
>>> SENTENCE.

>> That is not what I would have said. I would have said that "lest"
>> is followed by a subjunctive, and that "lest we not forget" is OK
>> (though a rather clumsy double negative) if we are talking about
>> what's needed to ensure that we do forget.

+1

> I don't think there is a subjunctive. The test is a third person
> singular subject. I would say Lest our nation fails to fulfill its
> destiny. but I suppose some people would prefer a subjunctive Lest
> our nation fail to fulfill its destiny.

Would you say "lest he is misled"?

> The subjunctive is putting up a stiff resistance to eradication.

Here too.

[David Kleinecke]

I wouldnt use "lest. But if I did I would say and accept either form
Lest he is misled
Lest he be misled

[bosod...@gmail.com]

LOL ROFL!

[bosod...@gmail.com]

"Three negatives stacked up" eh, so whadyuh call that?

[Dingbat]

1) Judge not or be judged nought and
2) Judge less or be judged least.

... get rid of lest too. Nought could mean an empty vessel like so:
Empty vessels make the most noise
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Empty+vessels+make+most+noise

The latter (2) has the disadvantage of stoking vanity in those with pretensions of humility, since deprecating expressions like:
"Of sinners I'm the greatest" by St Paul and
"Jesus was born lower than the lowest of angels"
tend to be used to elevate rather than depreciate, in religious usage.

[Ross]

Invitation to confusion. Rethink your sentence.

[CDB]

On 19/03/2016 3:31 AM, Dingbat wrote:
> CDB wrote:

[lest]

>> The word is old-fashioned and can be dispensed with if it gives
>> you problems. Some translations of one passsage in the Bible read
>> "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Others go "Judge not, that ye be
>> not judged."

> 1) Judge not or be judged nought and 2) Judge less or be judged
> least.

> ... get rid of lest too. Nought could mean an empty vessel like so:
> Empty vessels make the most noise
> http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Empty+vessels+make+most+noise

> The latter (2) has the disadvantage of stoking vanity in those with
> pretensions of humility, since deprecating expressions like: "Of
> sinners I'm the greatest" by St Paul and "Jesus was born lower than
> the lowest of angels" tend to be used to elevate rather than
> depreciate, in religious usage.

"I am nothing."

[CDB]

On 18/03/2016 11:37 AM, David Kleinecke wrote:
> CDB wrote:
>> David Kleinecke wrote:

[verb-form after "lest"]

>>> I don't think there is a subjunctive. The test is a third person
>>> singular subject. I would say Lest our nation fails to fulfill
>>> its destiny. but I suppose some people would prefer a subjunctive
>>> Lest our nation fail to fulfill its destiny.

>> Would you say "lest he is misled"?

> I wouldnt use "lest. But if I did I would say and accept either form
> Lest he is misled Lest he be misled

I think that's because you don't use the word, as you say.

[Don Phillipson]

> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 1:46:38 PM UTC-7, Don Phillipson wrote:
>
>> Not so. Parsing requires us to identify the "part of speech" of
>> every word. Lest is a conjunction, most sources tell us, but
>> they then differ (e.g. as to whether it is a subordinating conjunction
>> or a relative conjunction.) Lest may be a rare or unique word
>> in its obliqueness to the usual rules: but it is by no means
>> either useless or obsolete.

"David Kleinecke" <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:9c6d980c-9723-4a7f...@googlegroups.com...

> That is a very old fashioned notion of parsing. Those of us who dont

> work with parts of speech cannot use such a definition. . . .

The OP's question remains:

>> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence
>> parsed with and without the qualification of also a "not"?

He also asked whether the phrase was "obvious, illiterate and/or Redundant?"
The answers are Yes, No and Seldom.

[Steve Hayes]

It's easier and simpler to say "Lest we forget."




--
Steve Hayes http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Steve Hayes]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:40:44 +0000, Steve Hayes wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:49:11 -0700, bosodeniro wrote:
>
>> When, where, and how is "lest' supposed to be used in a sentence parsed
>> with and without the qualification of also a "not"?
>>
>> (See how I put it all in the subject line for you whiners with
>> newsreaders hating on Google Groups!)
>
> It's easier and simpler to say "Lest we forget."

Sorry, should be "Lest we remember."