Sleep On

[DKleinecke]

I just became aware of the meaning of "slept on" in some circles.
This meaning - verified by urbandictionary.com - is approximately
"overlooked" with a nuance that overlooking is a mistake. I found an
occurrance of "don't sleep on" in this sense in a title on a sports
page.

Anybody else have any helpful data?

This is of mild theoretical interest because "sleep" is one of the
most intransitive verbs in English. I was looking for more examples
of transitive "sleep" when I stumbled on "sleep on". I would consider
this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
"sleep" followed by an "on" phrase. There are also instances of "sleep
on" in the intransitive sense meaning "going on sleeping"

Most of the examples of transitive "sleep" are examples of the trope
"sleep the sleep of X" but there are few others - "The tent sleeps
four".

[R H Draney]

DKleinecke filted:

>
>I just became aware of the meaning of "slept on" in some circles.
>This meaning - verified by urbandictionary.com - is approximately
>"overlooked" with a nuance that overlooking is a mistake. I found an
>occurrance of "don't sleep on" in this sense in a title on a sports
>page.
>
>Anybody else have any helpful data?
>
>This is of mild theoretical interest because "sleep" is one of the
>most intransitive verbs in English. I was looking for more examples
>of transitive "sleep" when I stumbled on "sleep on". I would consider
>this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
>"sleep" followed by an "on" phrase. There are also instances of "sleep
>on" in the intransitive sense meaning "going on sleeping"

When I saw the subject line, I assumed there was some question about "I'll let
you know my decision after I've had a chance to sleep on it"....

>Most of the examples of transitive "sleep" are examples of the trope
>"sleep the sleep of X" but there are few others - "The tent sleeps
>four".

Would you count "Rip Van Winkle slept twenty years" as a third transitive
sense?...r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Peter T. Daniels]

That would depend on the definition of "transitive," no? Clearly
"years" isn't the patient of the verb.

[BCD]

***I don't know if this is what you're looking for, and rather doubt
that it is; but, for the record, legally speaking, one is not supposed
to "sleep on one's rights." See "Laches."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity)

Best Wishes,

--BCD

[Steve Hayes]

On 31 Mar 2013 19:53:42 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

>DKleinecke filted:
>>
>>I just became aware of the meaning of "slept on" in some circles.
>>This meaning - verified by urbandictionary.com - is approximately
>>"overlooked" with a nuance that overlooking is a mistake. I found an
>>occurrance of "don't sleep on" in this sense in a title on a sports
>>page.
>>
>>Anybody else have any helpful data?
>>
>>This is of mild theoretical interest because "sleep" is one of the
>>most intransitive verbs in English. I was looking for more examples
>>of transitive "sleep" when I stumbled on "sleep on". I would consider
>>this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
>>"sleep" followed by an "on" phrase. There are also instances of "sleep
>>on" in the intransitive sense meaning "going on sleeping"
>
>When I saw the subject line, I assumed there was some question about "I'll let
>you know my decision after I've had a chance to sleep on it"....

As did I.

That is the first meaning that comes to mind.

The second is "Burglars broke into the house, there was an earthquake, and the
house next door caught fire, but he slept on."


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[CDB]

But "sleeping the night away" does seem to have a transitive "sleep".

[Peter T. Daniels]

Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
back with "he slept the sleep of the just."

[Tom P]

What see here in this discussion are yet more examples of words, or more
exactly parts of speech, that in other Germanic languages are recognized
as verb modifiers, being denigrated in English grammar analysis to the
role of being either prepositions or adverbs. For example, in German,
"schlafen", to sleep, is intransitive, but "verschlafen" is transitive,
and changes the meaning to be roughly the equivalent of the OPs "slept on".
In the phrase "to sleep on that", the word "on" modifies the meaning of
the verb, and the compound "to sleep on" then becomes transitive. Nobody
in their right mind would understand "on" as a preposition of place to
mean that someone is literally sleeping on top of some object.
If I've *messed up* your conventional understanding of grammar, then you
will have to *put up with* it.

[micky]

Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I dreamed a
dream". Sounds stupid to me -- what else would one dream?

[Leslie Danks]

Of Jeannie with the light brown hair?

--
Les
"... be skeptical of government guidelines. The Indians learned not to trust
our government and neither should you." (Fallon & Enig)

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

It might sound stupid if you only read the title. (It's in "Les Miz".)
But of course the singer goes on to describe the content of the
dream.

The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There are several
examples that are common in English: live a life, die a death, etc.

[Bill McCray]

Les Mis.

Bill in Kentucky

[Robert Bannister]

On the other hand, all inflected languages that I know put time phrases
like this in the Accusative Case, so I assume they were felt to be
Direct Objects.

--
Robert Bannister

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:31:41 -0700 (PDT),
"benl...@ihug.co.nz" <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in
<news:4caeac78-b826-471d...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

> On Apr 2, 11:49�am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

[...]

>> Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I
>> dreamed a dream". �Sounds stupid to me -- what else
>> would one dream?

> It might sound stupid if you only read the title. (It's in
> "Les Miz".) But of course the singer goes on to describe
> the content of the dream.

And there's a parallel example from about 1300 in the Codex
Runicus:

Dr�mde mik en dr�m i nat um
silki ok �rlik p�l

I dreamed a dream last night of
...

(There is some doubt about the meaning of the second line;
for more see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr%C3%B8mde_mig_en_dr%C3%B8m_i_nat>.)

It's the oldest known secular song from the Nordic
countries; the German WP version of the article above has a
sound file of one interpretation of the surviving score.

> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There
> are several examples that are common in English: live a
> life, die a death, etc.

Sing a song. Einen Bogen biegen.

Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

It's very common in Semitic, where (for some obscure reason) it's
called paronomasia.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I'm pretty sure that all inflected languages you know that have an
"accusative case" also use it for "place to which" (as opposed to
"place where"). Are they felt to be Direct Objects?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:01:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote in
<news:dce07975-5056-4ba9...@ia3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

> On Apr 1, 7:31�pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

[...]

>> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object".
>> There are several examples that are common in English:
>> live a life, die a death, etc.

> It's very common in Semitic, where (for some obscure
> reason) it's called paronomasia.

Shame upun the Semitists!

Brian

[DKleinecke]

On Apr 1, 5:25 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:31:41 -0700 (PDT),

> "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in

> <news:4caeac78-b826-471d...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>
> in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:
>
> > On Apr 2, 11:49 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I
> >> dreamed a dream".  Sounds stupid to me -- what else
> >> would one dream?
> > It might sound stupid if you only read the title. (It's in
> > "Les Miz".) But of course the singer goes on to describe
> > the content of the dream.
>
> And there's a parallel example from about 1300 in the Codex
> Runicus:
>

>    Drømde mik en drøm i nat um
>    silki ok ærlik pæl

>
>    I dreamed a dream last night of
>    ...
>
> (There is some doubt about the meaning of the second line;
> for more see
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr%C3%B8mde_mig_en_dr%C3%B8m_i_nat>.)
>
> It's the oldest known secular song from the Nordic
> countries; the German WP version of the article above has a
> sound file of one interpretation of the surviving score.
>
> > The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There
> > are several examples that are common in English: live a
> > life, die a death, etc.
>
> Sing a song.  Einen Bogen biegen.
>
> Brian

In one of the English folk songs about the Battle of Otterburn

I dreamed a dream the other night
Beyond the Isle of Skye
I saw a dea man win a fight
And I think that man was I

[DKleinecke]

Sure and I have evolved my thinking. I now take the position that
there are no verbs in English that cannot take an object (or something
very like an object). Hence there is no division in English between
transitive and intransitive verbs (in this sense) - only transitive
and intransitive usages. Then I salvage the useful word "intransitive"
to mean verbs that do not occur as passives. Note that "be" is
intransitive in this sense (until somebody corrects me).

[DKleinecke]

So far as I can tell nobody grasped the point of my post.

Consider the sports headline I found of Google -
"Do not sleep on these players"
This is new construction - the kind of thing I call a mutation in the
language.

It creates at least one new ambiguity -
"When you consider the antiques do not sleep on the bed"
meaning either (1) "Do not nap on the bed" and (2) "Do not overlook
the bed". This is no worse than "The detective looked over the wall"
so ambiguity will not damage the mutation's chances for survival.

I think this is a linguistic mutation at very early point in its life
span. This mutation is very recent. My intuition is that this a
mutation with a very good chance of surviving. I think it is just
about at its critical age. If it can get past the next couple of
years it is likely to endure indefinitely.

[Nathan Sanders]

In article
<bfca36ff-672a-434a...@8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,

I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
transitive uses of verbs like "arrive", "consist", "depend", "excel",
"happen", "obsess", "occur", "thrive", and "yearn". Their analogues
to "slept a good sleep" don't quite seem to work, though some are
perhaps slightly better than others:

She arrived a quick arrival.
It consists a diverse consistency.
She depended a long dependence.
She excelled a solid excellence.
It happened a surprising happening.
She obsessed a frequent obsession.
It occurred an interesting occurrence.
She thrived a long thriving.
She yearned a sudden yearning.

Nathan

--
Department of Linguistics
Swarthmore College
http://sanders.phonologist.org/

[BCD]

On 4/1/2013 7:22 PM, DKleinecke wrote:
> So far as I can tell nobody grasped the point of my post.
>
> Consider the sports headline I found of Google -
> "Do not sleep on these players"
> This is new construction - the kind of thing I call a mutation in the
> language.
>
> It creates at least one new ambiguity -
> "When you consider the antiques do not sleep on the bed"
> meaning either (1) "Do not nap on the bed" and (2) "Do not overlook
> the bed". This is no worse than "The detective looked over the wall"
> so ambiguity will not damage the mutation's chances for survival.
>
> I think this is a linguistic mutation at very early point in its life
> span. This mutation is very recent. My intuition is that this a
> mutation with a very good chance of surviving. I think it is just
> about at its critical age. If it can get past the next couple of
> years it is likely to endure indefinitely.

***Actually, it appears that my citation of the legal concept of
"sleeping on one's rights" (*laches*) comes quite close indeed to what I
assume your example of sleeping on the players is intended to convey:
To sleep on them is to neglect or overlook them to one's detriment. In
other words, you snooze, you lose. In a hasty Google Book Search, I
find the specific phrase "sleep on one's rights" in 1909 in a case
before the Michigan Supreme Court; but I see "sleeping on your rights"
in 1862 (*The Works of Rufus Choate*). If this isn't what you're
getting at, please clarify.

Best Wishes,

--BCD (only reading at AUE)

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:49:53 -0400, Nathan Sanders
<san...@alum.mit.edu> wrote in
<news:sanders-CF8D19...@news.eternal-september.org>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

[...]

> I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
> transitive uses of verbs like "arrive", "consist", "depend", "excel",
> "happen", "obsess", "occur", "thrive", and "yearn". Their analogues
> to "slept a good sleep" don't quite seem to work, though some are
> perhaps slightly better than others:

> She arrived a quick arrival.
> It consists a diverse consistency.
> She depended a long dependence.
> She excelled a solid excellence.
> It happened a surprising happening.
> She obsessed a frequent obsession.
> It occurred an interesting occurrence.
> She thrived a long thriving.
> She yearned a sudden yearning.

'Excel' has a transitive sense:

'It is said that she excelled her brother both as an
instrumentalist and as a composer.'

<http://digital.nls.uk/special-collections-of-printed-music/pageturner.cfm?id=91348798&mode=transcription>

(I don't suppose that you'd accept the Popeye-esque 'I yearn
$20 an hour' ...)

Brian

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <1val4v7dyqj07$.1ka341pf...@40tude.net>,

Huh, eiw. I don't have that usage, but I'll retract "excel" from my
list.

> (I don't suppose that you'd accept the Popeye-esque 'I yearn
> $20 an hour' ...)

No. :-P

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 1, 9:45 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:01:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in

> <news:dce07975-5056-4ba9...@ia3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
> in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:
>
> > On Apr 1, 7:31 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object".
> >> There are several examples that are common in English:
> >> live a life, die a death, etc.
> > It's very common in Semitic, where (for some obscure
> > reason) it's called paronomasia.
>
> Shame upun the Semitists!

It was some German guy shortly after 1900 -- I don't immediately
remember who, because his book was specifically about the phenomenon
in Arabic, which I didn't much care about. Maybe it was before it got
its more usual meaning.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 1, 10:49 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article
> <bfca36ff-672a-434a-85b2-9de6ac90a...@8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,

>
>  DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 1, 10:04 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
> > > about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
> > > back with "he slept the sleep of the just."
>
> > Sure and I have evolved my thinking. I now take the position that
> > there are no verbs in English that cannot take an object (or something
> > very like an object).  Hence there is no division in English between
> > transitive and intransitive verbs (in this sense) - only transitive
> > and intransitive usages.
>
> I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
> transitive uses of verbs like

What do you mean by "verbs like" these? The only thing they
immediately seem to have in common is that they're true intransitives
and don't really take a cognate object. Is there something that makes
that likely to happen? Is there something that could have warned you
not to include "excel" in the list?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 2, 12:10 am, BCD <piltdo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 7:22 PM, DKleinecke wrote:

> > So far as I can tell nobody grasped the point of my post.
>
> > Consider the sports headline I found of Google -
> >      "Do not sleep on these players"
> > This is new construction - the kind of thing I call a mutation in the
> > language.

Is there any reason to believe that it's actually used that way (any
more, see below) by anyone but this writer? Is there any evidence that
this writer was a lawyer a century ago?

> > It creates at least one new ambiguity -
> >     "When you consider the antiques do not sleep on the bed"
> > meaning either (1) "Do not nap on the bed" and (2) "Do not overlook
> > the bed".  This is no worse than "The detective looked over the wall"
> > so ambiguity will not damage the mutation's chances for survival.
>
> > I think this is a linguistic mutation at very early point in its life
> > span. This mutation is very recent. My intuition is that this a
> > mutation with a very good chance of surviving. I think it is just
> > about at its critical age.  If it can get past the next couple of
> > years it is likely to endure indefinitely.
>
> ***Actually, it appears that my citation of the legal concept of
> "sleeping on one's rights" (*laches*) comes quite close indeed to what I
> assume your example of sleeping on the players is intended to convey:
> To sleep on them is to neglect or overlook them to one's detriment.  In
> other words, you snooze, you lose.  In a hasty Google Book Search, I
> find the specific phrase "sleep on one's rights" in 1909 in a case
> before the Michigan Supreme Court; but I see "sleeping on your rights"
> in 1862 (*The Works of Rufus Choate*).  If this isn't what you're
> getting at, please clarify.
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> --BCD (only reading at AUE)

So the phrase is now obsolete? Does (e.g.) Black's Law Dictionary
include it, and mention whether it's been superseded by some other
phrase?

[CDB]

On 01/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

No doubt inspired by foreign paronomasiasts of your acquaintance; I
thought an example that didn't take a cognate object would be worth
adding. (Thanks for the terminology.)

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-04-02, Brian M. Scott wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:49:53 -0400, Nathan Sanders
><san...@alum.mit.edu> wrote in
><news:sanders-CF8D19...@news.eternal-september.org>
> in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

> 'Excel' has a transitive sense:
>
> 'It is said that she excelled her brother both as an
> instrumentalist and as a composer.'
>
><http://digital.nls.uk/special-collections-of-printed-music/pageturner.cfm?id=91348798&mode=transcription>
>
> (I don't suppose that you'd accept the Popeye-esque 'I yearn
> $20 an hour' ...)

"I yam what I yam."


--
And remember, while you're out there risking your life and limb
through shot and shell, we'll be in be in here thinking what a
sucker you are. [Rufus T. Firefly]

[Adam Funk]

Does that count as *really* transitive?


--
I heard that Hans Christian Andersen lifted the title for "The Little
Mermaid" off a Red Lobster Menu. [Bucky Katt]

[BCD]

> So the phrase is now obsolete? Does (e.g.) Black's Law Dictionary
> include it, and mention whether it's been superseded by some other
> phrase?

***It seems to be current:

http://www.ruttlerlaw.com/blog/2012/10/prosecution-lach/

***Interestingly or not interestingly, what appears to be Black's Law
Dictionary on-line uses the expression not under Laches but rather under
Vigilance:

http://thelawdictionary.org/vigilance/

Best Wishes,

--BCD (reading only at AUE)

[Nathan Sanders]

In article
<ef11d655-0039-473f...@c6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Apr 1, 10:49�pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bfca36ff-672a-434a-85b2-9de6ac90a...@8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > �DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Apr 1, 10:04�am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
> > > > about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
> > > > back with "he slept the sleep of the just."
> >
> > > Sure and I have evolved my thinking. I now take the position that
> > > there are no verbs in English that cannot take an object (or something
> > > very like an object). �Hence there is no division in English between
> > > transitive and intransitive verbs (in this sense) - only transitive
> > > and intransitive usages.
> >
> > I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding

> > transitive uses of verbs like "arrive", "consist", "depend", "excel",

> > "happen", "obsess", "occur", "thrive", and "yearn"
>

> What do you mean by "verbs like" these?

"This list is not intended to be exhaustive, and probably includes, at
minimum, some verbs that are synonymous with or related to the listed
verbs, such as 'come', 'cohere', 'rely', 'transpire', 'fret', 'arise',
'prosper', and 'hanker'."

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 2, 12:20 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article

> <ef11d655-0039-473f-a306-4efa682ef...@c6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,

>  "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 1, 10:49 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <bfca36ff-672a-434a-85b2-9de6ac90a...@8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > >  DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Apr 1, 10:04 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > > Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
> > > > > about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
> > > > > back with "he slept the sleep of the just."
>
> > > > Sure and I have evolved my thinking. I now take the position that
> > > > there are no verbs in English that cannot take an object (or something
> > > > very like an object).  Hence there is no division in English between
> > > > transitive and intransitive verbs (in this sense) - only transitive
> > > > and intransitive usages.
>
> > > I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
> > > transitive uses of verbs like "arrive", "consist", "depend", "excel",
> > > "happen", "obsess", "occur", "thrive", and "yearn"
>
> > What do you mean by "verbs like" these?
>
> "This list is not intended to be exhaustive, and probably includes, at
> minimum, some verbs that are synonymous with or related to the listed
> verbs, such as 'come', 'cohere', 'rely', 'transpire', 'fret', 'arise',
> 'prosper', and 'hanker'."

So you're saying you have no answer to the question you conveniently,
and probably maliciously, snipped: What do these verbs have in common
_other than_ being true intransitives and at best with difficulty
taking a cognate object?

Did you come up with them simply by examining all the verbs you
happened to think of, or _did some principle govern which ones you
chose to test_?:

Why do you find that question so onerous that you chose to ignore it?

[Nathan Sanders]

In article
<502493d9-b881-4c51...@c15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Apr 2, 12:20�pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article
> > <ef11d655-0039-473f-a306-4efa682ef...@c6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > �"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Apr 1, 10:49�pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <bfca36ff-672a-434a-85b2-9de6ac90a...@8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > �DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Sure and I have evolved my thinking. I now take the position that
> > > > > there are no verbs in English that cannot take an object (or something
> > > > > very like an object). �Hence there is no division in English between
> > > > > transitive and intransitive verbs (in this sense) - only transitive
> > > > > and intransitive usages.
> >
> > > > I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
> > > > transitive uses of verbs like "arrive", "consist", "depend", "excel",
> > > > "happen", "obsess", "occur", "thrive", and "yearn"
> >
> > > What do you mean by "verbs like" these?
> >
> > "This list is not intended to be exhaustive, and probably includes, at
> > minimum, some verbs that are synonymous with or related to the listed
> > verbs, such as 'come', 'cohere', 'rely', 'transpire', 'fret', 'arise',
> > 'prosper', and 'hanker'."
>

> What do these verbs have in common

They are verbs for which "I'm having trouble coming up with
convincing, natural-sounding transitive uses".

> Did you come up with them simply by examining all the verbs you
> happened to think of,

Yes.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

Could be this?
Hermann Reckendorf, Uber Paronomasie in den semitischen Sprachen
(1909)
accessible at
http://archive.org/details/berparonomasie00reckuoft

But the word, at least in English, has had the sense "word play based
on words which sound alike" since the 16th century.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 3, 2:31 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-01, benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> > On Apr 2, 11:49 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:04:34 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> >> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >On Apr 1, 11:11 am, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> But "sleeping the night away" does seem to have a transitive "sleep".
>
> >> >Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
> >> >about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
> >> >back with "he slept the sleep of the just."
>
> >> Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I dreamed a
> >> dream".  Sounds stupid to me -- what else would one dream?
>
> > It might sound stupid if you only read the title. (It's in "Les Miz".)
> > But of course the singer goes on to describe the content of the
> > dream.
>
> > The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There are several
> > examples that are common in English: live a life, die a death, etc.
>
> Does that count as *really* transitive?

Remind me of what the criterion for *real* transitivity is again?

[Adam Funk]

(That wasn't clear, sorry.)

> Remind me of what the criterion for *real* transitivity is again?

I meant: does that count as making the verb belong to the "transitive
verb" category, or is it just a sort of specific transitive trick that
you can do with a wide range of intransitive verbs?



--
Slade was the coolest band in England. They were the kind of guys
that would push your car out of a ditch. --- Alice Cooper

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 3, 9:35 am, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:

I guess what I'm saying is that it depends on what notion of
transitivity you're working with. I'm not sure there is a "real
transitivity" that one can easily test for.

It's true that cognate objects are, in a way, a trick, since the
"object" is really just the verb in disguise. For that reason you
might consider these not fully transitive, just as some people would
consider reflexives not fully transitive, since the "object" is just
the subject playing a different role.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 2, 3:13 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article

> <502493d9-b881-4c51-b835-fa1e6a3c9...@c15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,

Why, then, is it problematic for you to say, "No, there is nothing
else distinctive about this set of verbs; they do not appear to follow
any principle or constitute a natural class"?

Whom do you think you're impressing with your petulant juvenility?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 2, 4:10 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> On Apr 3, 1:35 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Apr 1, 9:45 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:01:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> > > <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in
> > > <news:dce07975-5056-4ba9...@ia3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
> > > in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:
>
> > > > On Apr 1, 7:31 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > [...]
>
> > > >> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object".
> > > >> There are several examples that are common in English:
> > > >> live a life, die a death, etc.
> > > > It's very common in Semitic, where (for some obscure
> > > > reason) it's called paronomasia.
>
> > > Shame upun the Semitists!
>
> > It was some German guy shortly after 1900 -- I don't immediately
> > remember who, because his book was specifically about the phenomenon
> > in Arabic, which I didn't much care about. Maybe it was before it got
> > its more usual meaning.
>
> Could be this?

No, that _is_ it.

> Hermann Reckendorf, Uber Paronomasie in den semitischen Sprachen
> (1909)

> accessible athttp://archive.org/details/berparonomasie00reckuoft

>
> But the word, at least in English, has had the sense "word play based
> on words which sound alike" since the 16th century.

Maybe it doesn't, or didn't, have that sense in German.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Indeed, the cognitive object in Semitic isn't just any noun from the
same root, but the "infinitive absolute," a specific inflection that
any verb can make.

[Nathan Sanders]

In article
<5d2e73cb-5aaf-4fc4...@y12g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

It's not "problematic"; it's just unnecessary. I claimed that I had

"trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding transitive uses"

of them, nothing more.

[Robert Bannister]

On 2/04/13 8:25 AM, Brian M. Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:31:41 -0700 (PDT),

> "benl...@ihug.co.nz" <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in
> <news:4caeac78-b826-471d...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>
> in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:
>

>> On Apr 2, 11:49 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>

> [...]

>
>>> Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I
>>> dreamed a dream". Sounds stupid to me -- what else
>>> would one dream?
>
>> It might sound stupid if you only read the title. (It's in
>> "Les Miz".) But of course the singer goes on to describe
>> the content of the dream.
>

> And there's a parallel example from about 1300 in the Codex
> Runicus:
>

> Dr�mde mik en dr�m i nat um
> silki ok �rlik p�l

>
> I dreamed a dream last night of
> ...
>
> (There is some doubt about the meaning of the second line;
> for more see
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr%C3%B8mde_mig_en_dr%C3%B8m_i_nat>.)

I was disappointed that it wasn't about silkies or selkies with noble fur.

> It's the oldest known secular song from the Nordic
> countries; the German WP version of the article above has a
> sound file of one interpretation of the surviving score.
>

>> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There
>> are several examples that are common in English: live a
>> life, die a death, etc.
>

> Sing a song. Einen Bogen biegen.
>
> Brian
>

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 2/04/13 9:03 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Apr 1, 8:07 pm, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>> On 1/04/13 11:28 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 31, 10:53 pm, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>>> DKleinecke filted:
>>
>>>>> I just became aware of the meaning of "slept on" in some circles.
>>>>> This meaning - verified by urbandictionary.com - is approximately
>>>>> "overlooked" with a nuance that overlooking is a mistake. I found an
>>>>> occurrance of "don't sleep on" in this sense in a title on a sports
>>>>> page.
>>
>>>>> Anybody else have any helpful data?
>>
>>>>> This is of mild theoretical interest because "sleep" is one of the
>>>>> most intransitive verbs in English. I was looking for more examples
>>>>> of transitive "sleep" when I stumbled on "sleep on". I would consider
>>>>> this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
>>>>> "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase. There are also instances of "sleep
>>>>> on" in the intransitive sense meaning "going on sleeping"
>>
>>>> When I saw the subject line, I assumed there was some question about "I'll let
>>>> you know my decision after I've had a chance to sleep on it"....
>>
>>>>> Most of the examples of transitive "sleep" are examples of the trope
>>>>> "sleep the sleep of X" but there are few others - "The tent sleeps
>>>>> four".
>>
>>>> Would you count "Rip Van Winkle slept twenty years" as a third transitive
>>>> sense?...r
>>
>>> That would depend on the definition of "transitive," no? Clearly
>>> "years" isn't the patient of the verb.
>>

>> On the other hand, all inflected languages that I know put time phrases
>> like this in the Accusative Case, so I assume they were felt to be
>> Direct Objects.
>
> I'm pretty sure that all inflected languages you know that have an
> "accusative case" also use it for "place to which" (as opposed to
> "place where"). Are they felt to be Direct Objects?
>

Latin is the only one that (I think) uses Accusative /without a
preposition/ to indicate motion towards and I think that is only with
"domus", and I'm not even sure about that. The use of cases after
prepositions is, to my mind at least, quite separate from their use in
linking nouns to verbs.

--
Robert Bannister

[DKleinecke]

On Apr 2, 3:20 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article

> <5d2e73cb-5aaf-4fc4-a2e9-13edfcf34...@y12g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,

I agree that there are verbs that resist being used transitively. But
the set of verbs for which no transitive usage can be adduced has no
apparent commonality (as Peter observed). The set seems accidental. It
does not seem natural. Therefore I propose not to use an intransitive/
transitive/ ditransitive trichotomy in syntactical theory. The case
against any dichotomous verbs is obvious since "give" can be used with
no / one / two objects.

As always the non-existence of something is impossible to prove - at
best it can be suspected and, in my opinion, there is no reason to
suspect in any of verbs mentioned so far. Even if a huge corpus
showed no examples the corpus is only a tiny sample of all the
utterances possible. To Chomsky this was a very important fact.

I would parse "It happened that ... " and "It transpired that ... " as
transitive uses - and perhaps others but I see no point in further
searching.

I am tempted to parse, say, "It consisted of hay" as having "of hay"
as the object of "consist". Prepositional phrases like this are
tightly connected to the verb. But now I am content to say that
"consist of" is verb two words long" (and clearly used transitively).
Online Merriam-Webster also mentions "consist in" and "consist with" -
neither of which I would be likely to say. But there is no verb
"consist" - just three two word verbs which begin with
"consist" (shades of "cranberry"). I haven't done any further
research.

[Nathan Sanders]

In article
<a5732d14-4850-44af...@iq8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,

> I agree that there are verbs that resist being used transitively. But
> the set of verbs for which no transitive usage can be adduced has no
> apparent commonality

Where did anyone say they did?

> I would parse "It happened that ... " and "It transpired that ... " as
> transitive uses - and perhaps others but I see no point in further
> searching.

Those are likely examples of extraposition (note that they use dummy
"it").

> I am tempted to parse, say, "It consisted of hay" as having "of hay"
> as the object of "consist".

"Transitive" is usually only used for verbs that have a direct
(nominal) object, not a prepositional object.

> But there is no verb
> "consist" - just three two word verbs which begin with
> "consist" (shades of "cranberry"). I haven't done any further
> research.

But "consist of" allows intervening adverbs:

It consists only of sugar.
He went only down the street.

*He looked only up Mary's number.
*He tore only down the poster.

And intervening negation:

It consists not of sugar but of salt.
He went not down the street but up the river.

*He looked not up Mary's number but up Alice's.
*He tore not down the poster but down the plaque.

And allows pied piping in wh-questions:

Of what does it consist?
Down what did he go?

*Up whose number did he look?
*Down what did he tear?

And cannot be passivized:

*Sugar is consisted of by it.
*The street was gone down by him.

Mary's number was looked up by him.
The poster was torn down by him.

And cannot have the preposition appear on the other side of the object:

*It consists sugar of.
*He went the street down.

He looked Mary's number up.
He tore the poster down.

It doesn't appear to be in the same category as phrasal verbs, which
is what I assumed you were talking about. Do you have some third
category for classifying verb+preposition strings?

[Peter T. Daniels]

But that's not what you said.

People who deal in "philosophy of grammar" like to try to explain why
in+ACC and in+ABL (in+DAT, in German) happen to take those two
particular cases for those two particular meanings.

[Robert Bannister]

Well, I think you have chosen the most unlikely meaning. Time phrases
that are not connected to sentences by a preposition are in the
Accusative in German and those Slavonic languages that have cases. I
have forgotten too much Latin to be sure about that. In sentences like
"I spent a whole day there", "a whole day" most definitely looks like a
Direct Object.

--
Robert Bannister

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 22:32:56 -0400, Nathan Sanders
<san...@alum.mit.edu> wrote in
<news:sanders-CE7B61...@news.eternal-september.org>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

[...]

> It consists not of sugar but of salt.
> He went not down the street but up the river.

> *He looked not up Mary's number but up Alice's.
> *He tore not down the poster but down the plaque.

Now I want to find an opportunity to commit 'He tore not
down the poster but up the contract' or the like.

> And allows pied piping in wh-questions:

> Of what does it consist?
> Down what did he go?

> *Up whose number did he look?

I don't know, but it sure was a cute little number.

> *Down what did he tear?

The ski slope!

> And cannot be passivized:

> *Sugar is consisted of by it.
> *The street was gone down by him.

That last one doesn't actually sound wrong to me; odd, and
probably used with some humorous intent, but not out and out
wrong.

[...]

Brian

[R H Draney]

micky filted:

>
>Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I dreamed a
>dream". Sounds stupid to me -- what else would one dream?

I take it you haven't read "The Lathe of Heaven"....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:49:38 -0400, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:04:34 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
><gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 1, 11:11�am, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> On 31/03/2013 11:28 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> > R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>> >> DKleinecke filted:
>>
>>> >>> I just became aware of the meaning of "slept on" in some circles.
>>> >>> This meaning - verified by urbandictionary.com - is approximately
>>> >>> "overlooked" with a nuance that overlooking is a mistake. I found an
>>> >>> occurrance of "don't sleep on" in this sense in a title on a sports
>>> >>> page.
>>> >>> Anybody else have any helpful data?
>>> >>> This is of mild theoretical interest because "sleep" is one of the
>>> >>> most intransitive verbs in English. �I was looking for more examples
>>> >>> of transitive "sleep" when I stumbled on "sleep on". I would consider
>>> >>> this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
>>> >>> "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase. There are also instances of "sleep
>>> >>> on" in the intransitive sense meaning "going on sleeping"
>>> >> When I saw the subject line, I assumed there was some question about "I'll let
>>> >> you know my decision after I've had a chance to sleep on it"....
>>> >>> Most of the examples of transitive "sleep" are examples of the trope
>>> >>> "sleep the sleep of X" but there are few others - "The tent sleeps
>>> >>> four".
>>> >> Would you count "Rip Van Winkle slept twenty years" as a third transitive
>>> >> sense?...r
>>> > That would depend on the definition of "transitive," no? Clearly
>>> > "years" isn't the patient of the verb.
>>>

>>> But "sleeping the night away" does seem to have a transitive "sleep".
>>
>>Indeed it does. A while ago, David cited (I think) "sleep" as just
>>about the only truly intransitive verb in English, and I came right
>>back with "he slept the sleep of the just."
>

>Isn't there some Broadway show now with a hit song "I dreamed a
>dream".

Les Mis�rables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Mis%C3%A9rables_%28musical%29

>Sounds stupid to me -- what else would one dream?

It could be worse.

"To dream the impossible dream"
http://www.reelclassics.com/Actors/O%27Toole/impossibledream-lyrics.htm



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

[Adam Funk]

IBCW, but isn't that use of "domum" a vestige of another case or
construction that had been subsumed into the accusative by the time of
classical Latin?


--
War is God's way of teaching Americans geography.
[Ambrose Bierce]

[Adam Funk]

Interesting.


--
When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him
whose? --- Don Marquis

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 3, 11:00 pm, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:49:38 -0400, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com>

> Les Mis rableshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Mis%C3%A9rables_%28musical%29

>
> >Sounds stupid to me -- what else would one dream?
>
> It could be worse.
>
> "To dream the impossible dream"http://www.reelclassics.com/Actors/O%27Toole/impossibledream-lyrics.htm
>
> --
> Peter Duncanson, UK
> (in alt.english.usage)

This could only be worse if you are reading this as "dream which it is
impossible to dream", which really would be self-contradictory.
(Unless of course the sentence concluded "...is impossible.") I had
never actually thought of this reading. Thank you for expanding my
horizons.

[Robert Bannister]

Quite possibly. My knowledge of Latin more or less stopped when I left
school, so it didn't get very far. Moreover, I was only thinking of the
few Indo-European languages that I know; Finnish, I am sure, can go farther.

--
Robert Bannister

[DKleinecke]

On Apr 2, 7:32 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article

> <a5732d14-4850-44af-8212-54aef1332...@iq8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,

I think "phrasal verb" is too confused and carried too much baggage to
use. It is characteristic of English to treat multi-word
constructions as though they were strings of words and insert material
or front a component. Consider a maximum verb expansion like "I might
have been being watched" You can insert "often" anywhere without
significant change in meaning. There seem to be two kinds of two word
verbs though - some can insert an object between the words and some
can't - "I cleaned the mess up" but not "It consists hay of". So far
as I know "of" never is used this way.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 18:14:23 -0700 (PDT), DKleinecke
<dklei...@gmail.com> wrote in
<news:cac92a39-1607-4bd1...@9g2000pba.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

[...]

[...]

> I think "phrasal verb" is too confused and carried too
> much baggage to use.

Why? You yourself recognize the distinction below.

> It is characteristic of English to treat multi-word
> constructions as though they were strings of words

Or to treat them as units: the queen of England's corgis,
the White House, the pocket knife.

> and insert material or front a component. Consider a
> maximum verb expansion like "I might have been being
> watched" You can insert "often" anywhere without
> significant change in meaning.

It's barely possible to insert it in some of the slots at
all. And there is a clear difference between 'I often might
have been being watched' and 'I might have been being
watched often'.

> There seem to be two kinds of two word verbs though - some
> can insert an object between the words and some can't -
> "I cleaned the mess up" but not "It consists hay of". So
> far as I know "of" never is used this way.

In other words, 'clean up' is a phrasal verb, and 'consists
of' isn't.

Brian

[Arnaud Fournet]

Le jeudi 4 avril 2013 02:20:36 UTC+2, Robert Bannister a écrit :
> On 3/04/13 6:07 PM, Adam Funk wrote:
>

>
> > IBCW, but isn't that use of "domum" a vestige of another case or
>
> > construction that had been subsumed into the accusative by the time of
>
> > classical Latin?
>

***

yes, that's an interesting idea.

Personally I believe that some of PIE case-markers are ancient verbs:

*H4em- "to go to, arrive" hence domo+(H)m
*H1ey- "to reach a place" hence dom(o)-(H)y
*uHt-s "to come from" hence domo-s

A.

[Rainmaker]

DKleinecke wrote:
> I would consider
> this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
> "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.

What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.

I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where
-on is the second component but it's proving hard to come
up with any.

Rainmaker

[Bill McCray]

"A noise woke me up this morning. I thought about getting up, but
decided to sleep on."

"A cop told me to move on."

"Don't give up on the task; strive on."

Bill in Kentucky

[Katy Jennison]

Think on, lad.

--
Katy Jennison

[Peter T. Daniels]

You'll Never Walk Alone by Rodgers & Hammerstein (from Carousel)

Nettie

When you walk through a storm
Keep your chin up high
And don't be afraid of the dark.
At the end of the storm
Is a golden sky
And the sweet silver song of a lark.

Walk on through the wind,
Walk on through the rain,
Tho' your dreams be tossed and blown.Walk on, walk on
With hope in your heart
And you'll never walk alone,
You'll never walk alone.

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <kjmpp3$soo$1...@news.albasani.net>,

I don't think those count; in each case, the verb means the same thing
whether it's alone or used with "on", and "on" has a consistent
meaning in every example (along the lines of "continue; keep doing"),
and could be used with essentially any verb with compatible semantics
(live on, write on, read on, etc.). These examples of verb+"on" have
a predictable, compositional meaning, and don't really appear to be
expressions that are distinct from their base verbs.

Better examples would be something like "pick on" 'tease', "touch on"
'mention briefly', or "sign on" 'join up', "catch on" 'become popular;
understand', where "on" doesn't contribute a consistent meaning to the
expressions, so the full meaning of the two-word expression isn't
transparently derivable (it may not even be obviously connected to the
base verb). Instead, it is at least partially opaque, and thus, must
be memorized as an idiomatic unit that is a separate entity from the
base verb.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 6, 8:16 am, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <kjmpp3$so...@news.albasani.net>,

"dwell on" (discuss at length), "hit on" (pay unsolicited and usually
unwanted sexual attention to OR come up with an idea), "call on" (pay
a visit OR ask someone to do something)
etc

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 5, 3:16 pm, Nathan Sanders <sand...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <kjmpp3$so...@news.albasani.net>,

>  Bill McCray <billmcc...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4/5/2013 9:12 AM, Rainmaker wrote:
> > > DKleinecke wrote:
> > >> I would consider
> > >> this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
> > >> "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>
> > > What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>
> > > I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where
> > > -on is the second component but it's proving hard to come
> > > up with any.
>
> > "A noise woke me up this morning.  I thought about getting up, but
> > decided to sleep on."
>
> > "A cop told me to move on."
>
> > "Don't give up on the task; strive on."
>
> I don't think those count; in each case, the verb means the same thing
> whether it's alone or used with "on", and "on" has a consistent
> meaning in every example (along the lines of "continue; keep doing"),
> and could be used with essentially any verb with compatible semantics
> (live on, write on, read on, etc.).  These examples of verb+"on" have
> a predictable, compositional meaning, and don't really appear to be
> expressions that are distinct from their base verbs.

"Adverbial" on (as in my "walk on," also) makes it possible to use a
transitive verb without naming an object (write, read) or a -- what
shall we call "live" and "walk"? sort of middles? -- to be used
"absolutively."

> Better examples would be something like "pick on" 'tease', "touch on"
> 'mention briefly', or "sign on" 'join up', "catch on" 'become popular;
> understand', where "on" doesn't contribute a consistent meaning to the
> expressions, so the full meaning of the two-word expression isn't
> transparently derivable (it may not even be obviously connected to the
> base verb).  Instead, it is at least partially opaque, and thus, must
> be memorized as an idiomatic unit that is a separate entity from the
> base verb.

Those are garden-variety whatever-you-call'ems, phrasal verbs or
whatever.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:31:41 -0700 (PDT),
"benl...@ihug.co.nz" <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in
<news:4caeac78-b826-471d...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>
in sci.lang,alt.english.usage,alt.usage.english:

[...]

> The name for this kind of thing is "cognate object". There
> are several examples that are common in English: live a
> life, die a death, etc.

And it's off to Serendip: while helping a couple of folks
who are working through Eyrbyggja saga, I ran into <ok fell
hann fall mikit> 'and he fell a great fall'.

Brian

[Robert Bannister]

"Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you can't
say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be "put on"
(clothing) because you can say "put it on".

--
Robert Bannister

[DKleinecke]

Your examples are, in my opinion, a different kind of thing using a
different "on" morpheme which has connotations of continuing some
already started - as in "carry on". That would make it, in popular
terms, a temporal adverb. I think the last word on "phrasal" verbs has
yet to be said and I may change my opinion.

[abc]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> "Adverbial" on (as in my "walk on," also) makes it possible to use a
> transitive verb without naming an object (write, read) or a -- what
> shall we call "live" and "walk"? sort of middles? -- to be used
> "absolutively."

They're not needed for that though. Transitive verbs can be used
intransitively anyway. No special tricks are needed.

Rainmaker

[abc]

Yep, "think" is the verb there. No two-part verb in sight :)
Rainmaker

[abc]

Nathan Sanders wrote:
> In article<kjmpp3$soo$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> Bill McCray<billm...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/5/2013 9:12 AM, Rainmaker wrote:
>>> DKleinecke wrote:
>>>> I would consider
>>>> this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say, "mess up") and not as
>>>> "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>>>
>>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where
>>> -on is the second component but it's proving hard to come
>>> up with any.
>>
>> "A noise woke me up this morning. I thought about getting up, but
>> decided to sleep on."
>>
>> "A cop told me to move on."
>>
>> "Don't give up on the task; strive on."
>
> I don't think those count; in each case, the verb means the same thing
> whether it's alone or used with "on", and "on" has a consistent
> meaning in every example (along the lines of "continue; keep doing"),
> and could be used with essentially any verb with compatible semantics
> (live on, write on, read on, etc.). These examples of verb+"on" have
> a predictable, compositional meaning, and don't really appear to be
> expressions that are distinct from their base verbs.

Yes, well said. Someone else called it an "adverbial 'on' " which seems
pretty much spot on.

> Better examples would be something like "pick on" 'tease', "touch on"
> 'mention briefly', or "sign on" 'join up', "catch on" 'become popular;
> understand', where "on" doesn't contribute a consistent meaning to the
> expressions, so the full meaning of the two-word expression isn't
> transparently derivable (it may not even be obviously connected to the
> base verb). Instead, it is at least partially opaque, and thus, must
> be memorized as an idiomatic unit that is a separate entity from the
> base verb.

I agree, especially for "pick on" and "touch on" that can be used
transitively. "Carry on" would qualify as well, as the meaning is
different from "carry".

This also clarifies the OP's way of looking at things, seeing "sleep on"
as a two-component entity in the same group with "pick on".

Rainmaker

[Peter T. Daniels]

Let's see you do so in the sentences above.

Oops, you deleted the entire discussion, including the examples.

That was not helpful.

[CDB]

On 05/04/2013 7:37 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
> Rainmaker wrote:
>> DKleinecke wrote:

>>> I would consider this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say,
>>> "mess up") and not as "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.

>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.

>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where -on is the
>> second component but it's proving hard to come up with any.

> "Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you
> can't say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be
> "put on" (clothing) because you can say "put it on".

I think that the "on" in "sleep on [+ obj]" is a preposition too, or
maybe two: a combination of place, as in "sleep on a bed", and subject,
as in "meditate/discourse on the problem".

I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
history of the expression, as per OED? If it arose in the nineteenth
century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

The OED doesn't have "sleep on".

It does give:

on, adv.,

4.

a. Onward or forward in space, time, or condition. Freq. in set
phrasal verbs (esp. expressing motion), as bring on (see to bring on
1 at bring v. Phrasal verbs), follow on (see to follow on at follow
v. Phrasal verbs), etc. Sometimes repeated for emphasis, as on and
on (but see also sense A. 5b).

OE Andreas 1334 Hie wæron reowe, ræsdon on sona gifrum grapum.
?c1200 Ormulum (Burchfield transcript) l. 7717 He
wollde..Vss..brinngenn onn. To foll?henn þe??re bisne.
....

5.

a. With onward movement or action; continuously. Chiefly forming
phrasal verbs with the sense ‘to continue to do’ the action being
specified by the verb, as 'to speak on' , 'hold on', 'work on',
'wait on'.

OE Ælfric Lives of Saints (Julius) I. 456 Se biscop..nyste butan
hi sungon þone lofsang forð on.
?c1200 ...
....
c1390 Chaucer Cook's Tale 4353 Now telle on, gentil Roger, by
thy name.
?a1475 Ludus Coventriae 356 (MED), In savynge of oure lawys now
telle on.
1557 Earl of Surrey et al. Songes & Sonettes sig. K.iii, With
right good wyll, say on: lo, I thee here.
1579 Spenser Shepheardes Cal. Sept. 55 Now say on Diggon.

c. colloq. 'to be on about' : to keep talking about, 'to harp on',
to speak or write about (a subject). 'to be on at' (also 'to be
on to' ): to nag or berate (a person). 'to keep on' : to
persist in speaking or questioning, to nag at a person. 'to go on
about': see 'to go on' 8 at go v. Phrasal verbs 1. 'to go on at':
see 'to go on' 8 at go v. Phrasal verbs 1.

1907 N.E.D. at Ply v.2, To keep on at (a person) with
questions, petitions, arguments, etc.
....

[Peter Brooks]

On 6 Apr, 18:05, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:

> On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:41:44 -0400, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 05/04/2013 7:37 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
> >> Rainmaker wrote:
> >>> DKleinecke wrote:
>
> >>>> I would consider this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say,
> >>>> "mess up") and not as "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>
> >>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>
> >>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where -on is the
> >>> second component but it's proving hard to come up with any.
>
> >> "Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you
> >> can't say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be
> >> "put on" (clothing) because you can say "put it on".
>
> >I think that the "on" in "sleep on [+ obj]" is a preposition too, or
> >maybe two: a combination of place, as in "sleep on a bed", and subject,
> >as in "meditate/discourse on the problem".
>
> >I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
> >history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
> >century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>
> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>

2001 L. Voss To be Someone 174 ‘I'd rather {sleep on} the floor than
share with Joe’, said David, hurling himself onto the damp Z-bed under
the window.
1962 J. Onslow Bowler-Hatted Cowboy viii. 74 Beneath an old army
blanket I drowsed to {sleep on} my Winnipeg couch.
1914 M. & J. Findlater Crossriggs xx. 149 Take that beast and stop all
his work, feed him fat and let him {sleep on} the rug and tootle
around the garden.
1821 Scott Kenilw. xviii, ‘Let me sleep on that hard point,’ said
Varney; ‘I cannot else perfect the device I have on the stithy.’
1739–40 Richardson Pamela (1741) I. 267 I'll wake her,—said I.—No,
don't,—said she,—let her sleep on; we shall lie better without her.
1939 ‘J. Bell’ Death at Half-Term v. 92, I let our lot sleep on, but
the other four came over from the San, and woke them up.
1958 P. Scott Mark of Warrior i. ii. 44 In four hours Hussein would
wake him.‥ Esther would sleep on.
1969 J. Fraser Clap Hands if you believe in Fairies iv. 48 Don't worry
too much if he's not sleepy. I'll let him sleep on in the morning.
1969 Observer 20 July 1/2 Hints that the ‘moonwalk’ will also be
brought forward were strengthened when the astronauts' physician‥said
that he did not now expect the two men to go to sleep on the moon.
1953 K. Tennant Joyful Condemned vi. 54 There's that settee.‥ This big
lummox‥can sleep on that.
1885 F. Anstey Tinted Venus 30 The person who ‘looked after him’ did
not sleep on the premises.
1980 Courier-Mail (Brisbane) 16 Apr. 4/3 If you look like a grot,
you'll never get a flat. If you sleep on a beach you look like a grot.
1862 S. Hale Lett. (1919) 13 One thing shall I rejoice at,— my own bed,
—for this husk thing we sleep on is a beast.
1899 Kipling Stalky 132 They have babies and teething and measles and
all that sort of thing right bung in the school.    Ibid. 154, I used
to go bung off to sleep on a form sometimes.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
<peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 6 Apr, 18:05, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
>wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:41:44 -0400, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On 05/04/2013 7:37 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> >> Rainmaker wrote:
>> >>> DKleinecke wrote:
>>
>> >>>> I would consider this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say,
>> >>>> "mess up") and not as "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>>
>> >>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>>
>> >>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where -on is the
>> >>> second component but it's proving hard to come up with any.
>>
>> >> "Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you
>> >> can't say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be
>> >> "put on" (clothing) because you can say "put it on".
>>
>> >I think that the "on" in "sleep on [+ obj]" is a preposition too, or
>> >maybe two: a combination of place, as in "sleep on a bed", and subject,
>> >as in "meditate/discourse on the problem".
>>
>> >I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>> >history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
>> >century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>>
>> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>>

Not in the sense of "continuing to sleep".

>2001 L. Voss To be Someone 174 ‘I'd rather {sleep on} the floor than
>share with Joe’, said David, hurling himself onto the damp Z-bed under
>the window.
>1962 J. Onslow Bowler-Hatted Cowboy viii. 74 Beneath an old army
>blanket I drowsed to {sleep on} my Winnipeg couch.
>1914 M. & J. Findlater Crossriggs xx. 149 Take that beast and stop all
>his work, feed him fat and let him {sleep on} the rug and tootle
>around the garden.
>1821 Scott Kenilw. xviii, ‘Let me sleep on that hard point,’ said
>Varney; ‘I cannot else perfect the device I have on the stithy.’
>1739–40 Richardson Pamela (1741) I. 267 I'll wake her,—said I.—No,
>don't,—said she,—let her sleep on; we shall lie better without her.
>1939 ‘J. Bell’ Death at Half-Term v. 92, I let our lot sleep on, but
>the other four came over from the San, and woke them up.
>1958 P. Scott Mark of Warrior i. ii. 44 In four hours Hussein would

>wake him.? Esther would sleep on.

>1969 J. Fraser Clap Hands if you believe in Fairies iv. 48 Don't worry
>too much if he's not sleepy. I'll let him sleep on in the morning.
>1969 Observer 20 July 1/2 Hints that the ‘moonwalk’ will also be

>brought forward were strengthened when the astronauts' physician?said

>that he did not now expect the two men to go to sleep on the moon.

>1953 K. Tennant Joyful Condemned vi. 54 There's that settee.? This big
>lummox?can sleep on that.

>1885 F. Anstey Tinted Venus 30 The person who ‘looked after him’ did
>not sleep on the premises.
>1980 Courier-Mail (Brisbane) 16 Apr. 4/3 If you look like a grot,
>you'll never get a flat. If you sleep on a beach you look like a grot.
>1862 S. Hale Lett. (1919) 13 One thing shall I rejoice at,— my own bed,
>—for this husk thing we sleep on is a beast.
>1899 Kipling Stalky 132 They have babies and teething and measles and
>all that sort of thing right bung in the school.    Ibid. 154, I used
>to go bung off to sleep on a form sometimes.
>
>

[Robert Bannister]

On 6/04/13 10:41 PM, CDB wrote:
> On 05/04/2013 7:37 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> Rainmaker wrote:
>>> DKleinecke wrote:
>
>>>> I would consider this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say,
>>>> "mess up") and not as "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>
>>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>
>>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where -on is the
>>> second component but it's proving hard to come up with any.
>
>> "Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you
>> can't say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be
>> "put on" (clothing) because you can say "put it on".
>
> I think that the "on" in "sleep on [+ obj]" is a preposition too, or
> maybe two: a combination of place, as in "sleep on a bed", and subject,
> as in "meditate/discourse on the problem".

I agree. I often picture a dragon sleeping on its treasure or a chicken
on its egg. Sleep on it and see what it looks like in the morning.

>
> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
> history of the expression, as per OED? If it arose in the nineteenth
> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>
>

--
Robert Bannister

[Peter Brooks]

On Apr 6, 9:21 pm, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 6 Apr, 18:05, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
> >wrote:
> >> On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:41:44 -0400, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On 05/04/2013 7:37 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
> >> >> Rainmaker wrote:
> >> >>> DKleinecke wrote:
>
> >> >>>> I would consider this "sleep on" as a two-word verb (like, say,
> >> >>>> "mess up") and not as "sleep" followed by an "on" phrase.
>
> >> >>> What on earth for? That seems very anti-intuitive imho.
>
> >> >>> I'm trying to think of examples of two-word verbs where -on is the
> >> >>> second component but it's proving hard to come up with any.
>
> >> >> "Sleep on" fails the "it" test. You can say "mess it up", but you
> >> >> can't say "sleep it on". A proper phrasal verb with "on" would be
> >> >> "put on" (clothing) because you can say "put it on".
>
> >> >I think that the "on" in "sleep on [+ obj]" is a preposition too, or
> >> >maybe two: a combination of place, as in "sleep on a bed", and subject,
> >> >as in "meditate/discourse on the problem".
>
> >> >I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
> >> >history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
> >> >century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>
> >> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>
> Not in the sense of "continuing to sleep".
>

[abc]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Apr 6, 7:56 am, abc<a...@abc.net> wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> "Adverbial" on (as in my "walk on," also) makes it possible to use a
>>> transitive verb without naming an object (write, read) or a -- what
>>> shall we call "live" and "walk"? sort of middles? -- to be used
>>> "absolutively."
>>
>> They're not needed for that though. Transitive verbs can be used
>> intransitively anyway. No special tricks are needed.
>
> Let's see you do so in the sentences above.

If i did do it in the sentences above they would obviously not
be the same sentences anymore, so you are setting an impossible
task there.

But I can provide a couple of examples:
I write best in rainy weather. Don't read, listen to me instead.
Thou shalt not kill.

> Oops, you deleted the entire discussion, including the examples.
>
> That was not helpful.

I kept the part that I commented on and removed the rest.
A practice that tends to reduce confusion and counts as
helpful in my book.

[Dr Nick]

Rock on, Katy.

[CDB]

On 06/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
> "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:

>> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

[sleep on]

>>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>>> history of the expression, as per OED? If it arose in the nineteenth
>>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.

>> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".

I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry. I was looking for early
"transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning", which I
thought might help determine whether the double meaning of "on" in the
phrase ("physically on top of" and "about, with regard to") could have
originated in a pun. If a pun, it sounded distinctly Victorian to me;
therefore the time constraints.

The only example of the idiom (Scott) is from 1821, and does look very
much like a pun. I've tried to find advanced search at GBoo, but that
seems to be gone. What do they intend that archive for anyway?

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 11:42:18 -0400, CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 06/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>> "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>>> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[sleep on]
>
>>>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>>>> history of the expression, as per OED? If it arose in the nineteenth
>>>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>
>>> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>
>I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry. I was looking for early
>"transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning", which I
>thought might help determine whether the double meaning of "on" in the
>phrase ("physically on top of" and "about, with regard to") could have
>originated in a pun. If a pun, it sounded distinctly Victorian to me;
>therefore the time constraints.
>

The phrase I know and use is "sleep on it":
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sleep?q=sleep+on+it#sleep__36

sleep on it
informal delay making a decision until the following day:

The phrase isn't in the OED.

Google Books finds examples of "sleep on it" from 1830 and 1840 which
seem to have that meaning.

_The etymological compendium, or, Portfolio of origins and inventions
..._ By William Pulleyn
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oTU-AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA320&dq=%22sleep+on+it%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I6BhUfzuBYi20QW7n4HoBg&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBA

_Victorine; or, “I'll sleep on it.” A drama in three acts, etc_ By John
Baldwin Buckstone
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cNlUAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA53&dq=%22sleep+on+it%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I6BhUfzuBYi20QW7n4HoBg&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA

[Peter Brooks]

On Apr 7, 5:42 pm, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>
> > "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
> >> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [sleep on]
>
> >>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
> >>> history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
> >>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
> >> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>
> I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry.  I was looking for early
> "transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning",
>

Ah, so you really meant 'sleep on it':

" [OED]
c.B.I.1.c With upon or on (a matter), denoting the postponement of a
decision till the following day.
   In mod. use also with over in the same sense.

   1519 State Papers Hen. VIII, I. i. 3 His Grace‥sayd thatt he wold
slepe and drem apon the matter, and geff me an answer apon the
mornyng.    1600 Holland Livy xlii. xxv. 1129, I will sleepe upon it
and bee well advised what to doe for the best.    1668 H. More Div.
Dial. iii. xl. Wks. (1713) 289 It will not be amiss to consult with
one's Pillow, as the Proverb is, and sleep upon 't.    1755 Mem. Capt.
P. Drake I. xvi. 161 The Countess‥assured him, that she would not let
them sleep upon it.    1818 Scott Br. Lamm. x, The deil of ony
master's face he shall see till he has sleepit and waken'd on't.
   1889 Froude Chiefs Dunboy xiii. 185 Colonel Goring slept upon his
problem, and woke the next morning resolute.    a 1907 F. Thompson St
Ignatius Loyola (1909) x. 192 He discussed all measures with his
brethren; and ever enjoined them to sleep on the matter, and pray the
next morning before decision.    1926 V. McNabb Church & Land 83 My
friend rose from his seat. ‘I see—we must do things ourselves. I must
sleep on this.’    1959 S. Salton-Vane Black Whippet ii. 32 Sleep on
it. Think it over, and come and see me early tomorrow morning.    1962
P. Gregory Like Tigress at Bay ix. 99 Let me think about it, though.
I'd like to sleep on it.    1983 ‘W. Haggard’ Heirloom viii. 90 He
simply looked at a problem hard and then slept on it.
"

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 12:14:27 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
<peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 7, 5:42 pm, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 06/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>>
>> > "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>> >> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [sleep on]
>>
>> >>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>> >>> history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
>> >>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>> >> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>>
>> I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry.  I was looking for early
>> "transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning",
>>
>Ah, so you really meant 'sleep on it':
>
>" [OED]
>c.B.I.1.c With upon or on (a matter), denoting the postponement of a
>decision till the following day.
>   In mod. use also with over in the same sense.
>

..."

I did a straightforward OED online search which gave:

"No dictionary entries found for ‘sleep on it’."

I didn't noticed that following:
» Phrases (0) » Definitions (0) » Etymologies (0)
it then had:
» Quotations (7)
» Full Text (6)

Oops!

[Robert Bannister]

I don't think anyone would have any difficulty in understanding that any
more than "If music be the food of love, play on", but in BrE at least
we often say "sleep in" or "lie in" instead. The more I think about it,
the more the "in" usage seems peculiar.

--
Robert Bannister

[Peter Brooks]

I'm accustomed to a 'lie in' being the indulgence of sleeping later
than usual on a Sunday. I'm not sure about a 'sleep in' - I'd expect
it to be a collective sleep experience (what I hear my niece call a
'sleep over' - as, I think, in 'sleep over at somebody else's house'),
possibly a protest; 'The sleep apnoea sufferers staged a sleep in to
protest against the expense of CPAP machines'.

[Dr Nick]

"Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes:

> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 12:14:27 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
> <peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 7, 5:42 pm, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2013 1:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>>>
>>> > "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>>> >> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [sleep on]
>>>
>>> >>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>>> >>> history of the expression, as per OED?  If it arose in the nineteenth
>>> >>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.
>>> >> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".
>>>
>>> I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry.  I was looking for early
>>> "transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning",
>>>
>>Ah, so you really meant 'sleep on it':
>>
>>" [OED]
>>c.B.I.1.c With upon or on (a matter), denoting the postponement of a
>>decision till the following day.
>>   In mod. use also with over in the same sense.
>>
> ..."
>
> I did a straightforward OED online search which gave:
>
> "No dictionary entries found for ‘sleep on it’."

I now have stuck Meat Loaf syndrome.

[Peter T. Daniels]

They're different expressions! "Sleep on" (like "play on") is
'continue to sleep'. "Sleep in" is 'not get up and go to work (or to
play -- you can sleep in on a day off, too) in the morning'.

The nominalization adduced by Brooksie is a very British thing, heard
by me only in *As Time Goes By*, where it seems just about any such
verb can be nominalized to "have a ____."

[CDB]

On 07/04/2013 12:41 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:

> CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Peter Brooks wrote:
>>> "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>>>> CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> [sleep on]

>>>>> I'm sorry, I haven't been following closely -- has anyone posted the
>>>>> history of the expression, as per OED? If it arose in the nineteenth
>>>>> century or even the late eighteenth, I would be willing to call it a pun.

>>>> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".

>> I didn't make my request very clearly; sorry. I was looking for early
>> "transitive" uses of "sleep on" meaning "decide in the morning", which I
>> thought might help determine whether the double meaning of "on" in the
>> phrase ("physically on top of" and "about, with regard to") could have
>> originated in a pun. If a pun, it sounded distinctly Victorian to me;
>> therefore the time constraints.

> The phrase I know and use is "sleep on it":
> http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sleep?q=sleep+on+it#sleep__36

> sleep on it
> informal delay making a decision until the following day:

Yes, that's what I meant by "'transitive'" and "+ object". I didn't put
"it" there because the object can also be a variety of nouns.

> The phrase isn't in the OED.

> Google Books finds examples of "sleep on it" from 1830 and 1840 which
> seem to have that meaning.

> _The etymological compendium, or, Portfolio of origins and inventions
> ..._ By William Pulleyn
> http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oTU-AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA320&dq=%22sleep+on+it%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I6BhUfzuBYi20QW7n4HoBg&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBA

Thank you. Is "advanced search" still available to some? The phrasing
looks punnish again: "go to bed, and sleep on it".

> _Victorine; or, “I'll sleep on it.” A drama in three acts, etc_ By John
> Baldwin Buckstone
> http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cNlUAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA53&dq=%22sleep+on+it%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I6BhUfzuBYi20QW7n4HoBg&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA

This one looks more like idiomatic use -- later? I couldn't get to the
dates of the extracts from the linked page.

[CDB]

On 07/04/2013 3:14 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:

So much for the Victorians. Thank to both for the clarification.

[Rich Ulrich]

On Mon, 08 Apr 2013 11:06:16 -0400, CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Thank you. Is "advanced search" still available to some?

https://groups.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en&q=&hl=en&


--
Rich Ulrich

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 8, 12:41 pm, Rich Ulrich <rich.ulr...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 08 Apr 2013 11:06:16 -0400, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Thank you.  Is "advanced search" still available to some?
>
> https://groups.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en&q=&hl=en&

CDB was asking about google books advanced search.

I don't know what it might used to have been like, but these days
after you search some expression, there's a row of choices below the
big search window across the top, where you can refine by status
(free, snippet, no view), date, etc., and there's one at the end with
maybe the sort of choices CDB is looking for.

[CDB]

On 08/04/2013 12:41 PM, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Thank you. Is "advanced search" still available to some?

> https://groups.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en&q=&hl=en&

As Peter says, it's GooBoo I want to search. Thanks for your reply,
though, which inspired me to google for it, dur.

http://books.google.com/advanced_book_search

[Daniel James]

In article <sanders-CF8D19...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Nathan Sanders wrote:
> I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
> transitive uses of verbs like ... "obsess" ...

How about:
"The notion that he was being followed began to obsess him"?

Cheers,
Daniel.

[Daniel James]

In article <4ah0m8djtepnk18se...@4ax.com>, Peter
Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> The OED doesn't have "sleep on".

Nor does it require one, surely?

I see nothing wrong in:

"I was disturbed by a noise in the night, but my wife slept on until
breakfast time."

for example.

I wouldn't call in an example of "two-word verbs where -on is the
second component", though.

Cheers,
Daniel.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 21, 11:00 pm, Daniel James <dan...@me.invalid> wrote:
> In article <sanders-CF8D19.22495301042...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Indeed, it is the _intransitive_ use of "obsess" that is a rather
recent innovation.
OED has examples only since the 1970s.

[Peter T. Daniels]

In an interview this morning, Massachusetts governor Duvall Patrick
said he was proud that Bostonians "turned to, not on, each other" this
past week -- prepositional, not adverbial, of course, but a nice
construction.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

Reminds me of the prep/adv switching in an ancient bit of recorded
comedy (ca.1970), which imagines a White House aide [?] trying to
introduce Richard Nixon to marijuana:

Aide: Mr President, would you like to ... turn on? [adv]
Nixon: Uh, OK. Who do you want me to turn on? [prep]

[Nathan Sanders]

In article <VA.0000079...@me.invalid>,

Ah, nice. That usage didn't occur to me because I don't have it in my
native idiolect.

Nathan

--
Department of Linguistics
Swarthmore College
http://sanders.phonologist.org/

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:49:34 -0400, Nathan Sanders wrote:
> Daniel James <dan...@me.invalid> wrote:
>> Nathan Sanders wrote:
>> > I'm having trouble coming up with convincing, natural-sounding
>> > transitive uses of verbs like ... "obsess" ...

>> "The notion that he was being followed began to obsess him"?
>Ah, nice. That usage didn't occur to me because I don't have it in my
>native idiolect.

Where did you think "he was obsessed" came from? Intransitive "obsess"
is an extremely new use. I don't recall ever hearing it before about
1980, and then only in psychobabble.

ŹR There's really no such thing as a Loser's Club. --Spot
http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/emopvere.html Sorry! 1019