I’m talking about, for example, someone saying “You just can’t put tomato sauce on noodles and call it spaghetti,” when what they mean is something I would express by saying “You can’t just put tomato sauce on…”
In my ideolect, “one can’t just…” means “it is impossible to simply…” while “one just can’t…” means “It’s simply but emphatically the case that it is impossible to…” The two usages are not interchangeable.
But I’m starting to think I might be the only one. Is this just something I made up?
I’ll agree that the two usages are not interchangeable, and would agree with the OP’s definitions if it weren’t for the fact that, in my lexicon, “spaghetti” is the name of a specific form of pasta – the base to which a sauce is added, not the name of the “pasta+sauce” combo. I realize, however, that for many people (particularly in the US) the phrase “we’re having spaghetti tonight” is parsed as “we’re having some form of pasta with an unspecified sauce, but it’s a good bet that it’ll be the same combination as last time”.
You’re talking to the wrong guy. I insist on calling it “spaghetti” when I put tomato sauce, garlic, oregano etc. together and pour it over linguini noodles.
Not really “talking to the wrong guy”, Frylock: although my own personal usage of “spaghetti” is limited to the pasta, I’m fully aware that many people use it to refer to the combo.
Actually, I’ve known at least one person (in the US) who used “spaghetti” to refer to the sauce itself even in the absence of pasta, as in “lets make spaghetti and have it over couscous”.
Anyway, this is all a hijack. I agree with the OP that “just can’t” is not the same as “can’t just”.
I hear both and to me they have somewhat different meanings
“You can’t just put tomato sauce on noodles and call it spaghetti” would be a gentle scolding implying basically “I know you mean well and we’ll let it go for now but that’s not the way it works”.
“You just can’t put tomato sauce on noodles and call it spaghetti” is a much stronger dressing down impugning the morals and ethics of the person committing the offense. OK, I exaggerate a bit, but the idea is that “you just can’t do X” means that X goes against all that is good and right and just.
“can’t just” points out a foible in a humorous manner; “just can’t” points out an act that needs to stop happening. You can’t just eliminate “just can’t” since it serves a useful purpose. You just can’t!
(I hope you didn’t think, though, that I was saying no one should say “just can’t.” I was saying people are using it wrong (read “in a way I don’t like”), not that they shouldn’t be using it.)
Where/when the heck did “just” come to mean “simply”? It bugs the crap out of me for some reason. Especially since “just” shows up in Protestant prayers more often than “Jesus”:
Lord, we just come to you today and just ask that you would just be with us as we go through our day and just guide our steps. We just ask of you, Jesus, to just watch over us and protect us, and we just thank you for being there for us. Amen.
I just don’t understand it.
But it just doesn’t matter. It just doesn’t matter. It just doesn’t matter!
From here I see that the two senses of “just” orginate independently. There has been a word “just” meaning “merely” since 1665.
But like you, I’m very annoyed by the over-use of “just” in certain protestant circles. In fact, I’m annoyed just by the way they use it, without regard to how often they use it. I used to have to sing songs with lyrics like “I just want to praise you, Lord,” and this “just” always struck me as oddly self-serving. It’s like, “Gosh, how could anyone blame us or think badly of us, this is all we want!” It’s almost a way of bragging, or of defiantly asserting oneself.
Hard to explain I guess. But for me it was a factor leading to the way I questioned my family’s religious practice in my later childhood.
Ha! I was thinking of this usage of the word while reading the OP, but I wasn’t sure how to describe the “sweetly earnest” flavor it is employed to express in this instance. I wasn’t aware of the church-culture sort of connection but this is exactly right. I happen to associate it with wholesome girls who have squeaky little voices and to me it seems to infantilize the speaker a little bit. Painfully twee I think.
I agree with RickJay et.al. I haven’t heard the usage described in the OP much if at all, but if I did, I would assume the speaker made a mistake and/or was not a native speaker.
