Ive posted the
days changes to the philosophy
papers blog, but there isnt a lot there to get
excited about. The bugs with the program Im using are getting persistent, so I
might have to change to a new program shortly.
Ive been thinking
a little more about that Dylan line, which we might write as either (1) or (2).
(1) When you aint
got nothin, you got nothin
to lose.
(2) When you got nothing, you got
nothing to lose.
What struck me was
that although (2) more or less means the same thing as (3), it isnt obvious that it doesnt have any
important syntactic differences from it.
(3) If you got nothing, you got nothing to
lose.
In particular, Im
not sure that when licences the same
kind of negative polarity items as if.
And thats because Im not sure (really not sure not not sure liloting for sure not) whether (4)
is grammatically acceptable, as (5) is.
(4) When you meet someone who has ever been to
China, ask them what they thought of the local food!
(5) If you meet someone who has ever
been to China, ask them what they thought of the local food!
The problem is ever. Clearly (6) and (7) are
unacceptable in modern English.
(6) I will meet someone who has ever been to China.
(7) I met someone who has ever been
to China.
You can only use ever in, loosely speaking, a negative
context. Clearly if produces such a
context (at least in the antecedent), but Im not sure whether in my dialect when does.
Any thoughts?