“Think” has been used as a noun since at least 1834 (quotes from the OED):
1834: We lie lown yonder..and have time for our ain think.
1870: Ruth did talk..when she came out of one of her thinks.
1891: Let’s have a cigar and a quiet think.
1950: I had a good think about it that night.
The first is from a Scottish source, but do the others really sound unnatural to you?
BTW, this is what the OED says about “to have another thing coming”:
Yup, I grew up with “thing” (reinforced by the Judas Priest MTV video circa 1983), but later realized it had originally been “think,” which made more sense when coupled with the phrase that should precede it (“If you think…” any of many things, e.g. "…I’m gonna just keep putting up with you…). That it is a nouned verb never bothered me; it vaguely resembled many a phrase in, say, Huckleberry Finn.
I assumed the smart people of the Dope would surely know that “Think” is undoubtedly the correct answer, and am fully gobsmacked that “Thing” is currently leading the poll.
I personally regard Judas Priest as the authority for many things in life, as well as this “think” vs “thing” debate. Which reminds me, it’s time for another Screaming for Vengeance session today!
This ngram overstates the relevance of ‘another thing coming’, because that series of words operates in multiple circumstances, e.g. ‘there’s yet another thing coming’ or ‘there’s another thing coming out’. Opening the ngram query pulls, I see a lot of such uses, but no corresponding inapplicable uses for ‘think’.
I can accept it as an archaic use of the word. None of them sound like anything I’ve ever heard a live person say in real life.
I’m persuaded that it might have originally been "think’, but i think the weirdness of the phrasing in modern English (and that think c… sounds so much like thing c…) doomed it.
This, pretty much. If you’re asking, point blank, about “correctness,” it’s “think.”
But “thing” is out there in everyday use, it sounds pretty much the same when spoken in front of “coming,” and either way, there’s no danger of ambiguity or confusion.
Language evolves. People will complain about the use of “literally” as an intensifier, but for those folks, the battle is lost.
ETA: On second thought, I suppose “literally” isn’t a good example. But you get the idea. I hope.
I have to go with Rob Halford on this one. Who am I to argue with a man who convinced an entire generation of metalheads to adopt the Gay Leather Aesthetic.
Sort of. I hesitated because of the word “correct.” Linguists don’t use this word. Prescriptive grammarians advising on socially acceptable usages do – but in this case, that isn’t even the issue: “thing” is just fine, and much more common now.
It would have been clearer to ask which was the earlier form. In the end, I only went with “think” as “correct” because it’s more logical and interesting when paired with the lead-in phrase…but I could just as well choose “thing,” because language evolves in illogical ways all the time, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
My mom used to say that phrase a lot, and as a kid, I was sure she said “thing”, but as I grew older, I heard “think”. I very much doubt she changed what she was saying. I’m sure I was hearing it wrong for years.
Sure. I used “correct” (or a variation thereof) because the poll question does. Or, to be more precise, the question says “more correct,” which I would assume is meant as “Which of these choices is preferable to the other?”
But then again, if I’m reading a novel and a character says, “You’ve got another thing coming,” I’m not going to care unless the character is someone who would more likely say “think.”
Yes, I’m not convinced they are even district in spoken English. So maybe most of the people I’ve heard say that were actually saying “think”, and that just never occurred to me because my brain doesn’t classify “think” as a noun.
