# Reference books exist, people! (mild, swear-free) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 11, 2004, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795 "2004-06-11T10:57:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/21 "2004-06-11T14:41:10Z")
Doohh… no no no! The phrase is a set-up and punchline gag. It says “if you **think** this, then you had better think again” … or, more snappily, and with fine disregard for grammar “if that’s what you think, you have another think coming”. It seems like there’s a huge mental disconnect here. Can somebody please tell me that, even if they’ve always heard “thing”, they can at least see the logic in what I am trying to say? Saying “but _think_ as a noun doesn’t make sense” says to me that you haven’t read what I’ve been writing at all. The whole \*\*\*point \*\* \* of the phrase is the doubling of “think”, even if that use is falling by the wayside. ---
**Author:** ![Aholibah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Aholibah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aholibah)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/22 "2004-06-11T14:45:05Z")
Although I was a child at the time, I can still distinctly remember the thrill of comprehension I felt when I first understood that the mysterious threat I’d misheard as “you’ve got another thing coming” was actually “you’ve got another think coming.” I felt like there was an audible _click_ as both the sense and the humor of the saying suddenly fell into place. It baffles me that people who have made it to adulthood mishearing this expression (or accurately hearing people who were misspeaking it), do not leap for joy when they learn the correct (or original, if you insist) expression. That they instead staunchly defend the bastardized phrase as somehow more logical makes we want to weep. Or vomit. Or kick the cat. No, no. The cat has more sense. 😃 There, how’s that for passion! Don’t even get me started on “mute point”! (And I apologize in advance if my punctuation of that last exclamatory remark hurts anyone. I can never decide what I want to do with the quote marks and the final punctuation in a situation like that.) ---
**Author:** ![DogMom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9c0ed/32.png) [@DogMom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DogMom)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/23 "2004-06-11T14:48:05Z")
Put me down as a “another think coming” person. I’ve never heard “another thin **g** coming”. Born and raised in Michigan, so not everyone this side of the Pond thinks thing. 😃 And I’m thinking that could be downright dangerous to use “another thing” in the pint example: “If you think I’m buying you another pint, you’ve got another thing coming” could easily start a bar fight when you refuse to buy the pint that your buddy THOUGHT you’d said was coming! (“another thing” easily being interpreted by hopeful barfly as “another PINT”). \ ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/24 "2004-06-11T14:53:10Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > That’s the whole point, **Cheesy**. It’s a “joke”. 'Round here, jokes are supposed to be funny. ---
**Author:** ![Scarlett67](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scarlett67/32/7387_2.png) [@Scarlett67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarlett67)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/25 "2004-06-11T14:55:04Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > The original seems to mean if you think this… think again. That’s fine and lovely, but it depends on using the word think as a noun. I don’t use think as a noun, it sounds stilted and wrong, which is why the phrase sounds wrong to me. Outside of this singular phrase, where else do people use think as a noun? (note, this is a rhetorical question, even if someone somewhere says “I’m gonna give this a think”, I don’t care, it will continue to sound weird to me) The good folks who compiled _Merriam-Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged_ ((C) 1993) seem to think (er, ahem) it can be a noun (p. 2376): > [@](#): > > **[sup]3[/sup]think**. . . _n_ . . . **1 :** an act of thinking \ \ **2 :** something (as an idea or opinion) that is thought \ _Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate_ (the chief abridgment of MW3 and the dictionary most commonly used in book publishing) gives only definition 1 and adds that this usage originated around 1834. From the alt.english.usage FAQ: > [@](#): > > “If you think that, you have another think coming” means “You are > mistaken and will soon have to alter your opinion”. This is now > sometimes heard with “thing” in place of “think”, but “think” is the > older version. Eric Partridge, in _A Dictionary of Catch Phrases,_ > gives the phrase as “you have another guess coming”, “US: since the > 1920s, if not a decade or two earlier”. Clearly “think” is closer > to “guess” than “thing” is. The OED gives a citation with “think” > from 1937, and no evidence for “thing”. Merriam-Webster Editorial > Department writes: “When an informal poll was conducted here at > Merriam-Webster, about 60% of our editors favored ‘thing’ over > ‘think,’ a result that runs counter to our written evidence.” Sixty percent (even in an informal poll among editors) doth not a landslide make. Even though I am a strong adherent to “another think coming,” I must agree that BOTH are acceptable, and were I to come across “another thing coming” while copyediting, I would not change it. (But I would bristle internally.) Those of you who are arguing that “think” cannot be used as a noun will kindly find another argument. For those of you who disdain the dictionary as evidence, I will point out that MW is quite descriptivist, which means that it presents the language as it is actually spoken and written by most English speakers. You may think “another think coming” sounds stupid, but it is perfectly legitimate. Adjust your ear and live with it. And if you continue to object, call those of us who prefer it “brain-damaged,” etc., then I will thank you not to ever use any idiomatic or humorous expression that does not conform to the exact letter of the most formal, serious written English. Because anything else sounds stupid, right? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/26 "2004-06-11T14:55:24Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Mark me down as another one who’s never heard anyone say “Another think coming.” Maybe that’s the original phrase (although I’d be curious to see a cite for that), but to my memory no one has ever spoken it in my presence. From the _Oxford English Dictionary_ (the complete, 20+ volume version): > [@](#): > > **think** , _n_ > > b. **_to have another think coming_: to be greatly mistaken.** > > **1937** _Amer. Speech_ XII. 317/1 Several different statements used for the same idea, that of _some one’s making a mistake_…[e.g.] you have another think coming. **1942** T. BAILEY _Pink Camellia_ xxvii. 199 If you think you can get me out of Gaywood, you have another think coming. **1979** _Jrnl. R. Soc. Arts_ CXXVII. 221/2 Any design consultant who thinks he is going to get British Leyland right by himself on his own has got another think coming. There is no comparable entry in the _OED_ for “another thing coming.” As you can see from the quotations, the phrase is a twentieth century construction. On the whole descriptivist versus prescriptivist melee that seems to be breaking out in this thread, i subscribe neither to an anti-intellectual descriptivism that sees dictionaries simply as describers of how people speak, and nor do i have any time for an authoritarian prescriptivism that would prevent any growth or development of language. The interesting thing is that the OP takes a rather prescriptivist position, yet one of the usages that he (she?) defends–“another think coming”–is a rather recent (and, in my opinion, quite awful) addition to the language. Personally, i don’t find the term “another think coming” either useful or amusing, so i just don’t use it. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/27 "2004-06-11T14:56:08Z")
Bollocks. You have often heard “another think coming”; you just didn’t know what other people were saying. It’s like misheard song lyrics – you can hear it over and over, and still get it wrong. Would the expression be more palatable if quotes were used? Like so: “you’ve got another ‘think’ coming”? And the “thing” expression is no more correct for being common than “Louie Louie” really has obscene lyrics just because everyone thinks so. One may, if one wishes, allow that there two expressions, one derived from the other, with the newer expression characterized by its failure of logic, its popularity among the ignorant, and its vigorous defense by descripivists. ---
**Author:** ![Rufus\_Xavier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/eada6e/32.png) [@Rufus\_Xavier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rufus_Xavier)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/28 "2004-06-11T15:00:38Z")
[Joey] No, it’s moo point. [/Joey] ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/29 "2004-06-11T15:00:56Z")
I hear ya. I see your logic, and I understand the humor. I still don’t give a flying fuck. “Another think coming” sits about as well with me as “The great symphonies of Neil Sedaka.” It’s just wrong. _shudder_ ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/30 "2004-06-11T15:15:17Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > Bollocks. You have often heard “another think coming”; you just didn’t know what other people were saying. It’s like misheard song lyrics – you can hear it over and over, and still get it wrong. Would the expression be more palatable if quotes were used? Like so: “you’ve got another ‘think’ coming”? > > And the “thing” expression is no more correct for being common than “Louie Louie” really has obscene lyrics just because everyone thinks so. One may, if one wishes, allow that there two expressions, one derived from the other, with the newer expression characterized by its failure of logic, its popularity among the ignorant, and its vigorous defense by descripivists. Of course, as a relatively new (20th C) phrase that bastardizes the word “think” and does nothing but substitute for more euphonious and grammatical terms, the phrase “another think coming” is, itself, a descriptivists dream. ---
**Author:** ![BiblioCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ed8c4c/32.png) [@BiblioCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BiblioCat)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/31 "2004-06-11T15:17:45Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > I hear ya. I see your logic, and I understand the humor. I still don’t give a flying fuck. “Another think coming” sits about as well with me as “The great symphonies of Neil Sedaka.” It’s just wrong. _shudder_ Ditto. I get the “double think” humor, but it still sounds wrong. And I still stand by my assertation that I’ve never heard anybody say it. I never heard it before I read an argument about it (much like this one) in a thread on this very MB, so it was within the last two years. ---
**Author:** ![Cerri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3bc359/32.png) [@Cerri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cerri)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/32 "2004-06-11T15:31:50Z")
Put me in the “another think” camp…thing makes no sense in the context of the phrase as a play on words (to me at least, though I understand it does to some people). Whenever I hear the phrase “If you think \_\_\_\_\_\_\_, you’ve got another think coming!”, I hear it in Bill Cosby’s voice, ala the bit in his Fatherhood stand-up act. If Bill Cosby uses think, it’s good enough for me! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/33 "2004-06-11T15:57:43Z")
> [@Scarlett67](#): > > And if you continue to object, call those of us who prefer it “brain-damaged,” etc., then I will thank you not to ever use any idiomatic or humorous expression that does not conform to the exact letter of the most formal, serious written English. Because anything else sounds stupid, right? :rolleyes: Apologies if the brain damage comment caused offense. I was just trying to humorously indicate that both sides are saying the other expression “makes no sense whatsoever”. While I’m sure the noun usage is perfectly valid, if you try to say “Let’s exchange thinks.” as Webster suggests, expect some blank looks from your audience. Oh, and I always thought Bill Cosby just misspoke that line! :smack: ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/34 "2004-06-11T16:00:44Z")
> [@Cerri](#): > > Put me in the “another think” camp…thing makes no sense in the context of the phrase as a play on words (to me at least, though I understand it does to some people). It makes no sense as a play on words, but it makes total sense in the context of no play on words. And “think” sits as well with me as the phrase “Bill O’Reilly, fair and balanced reporter.” Besides, it sounds way too German. “If you sink vee are not Nazis, zen you haff anozzer sink comink.” ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/35 "2004-06-11T16:03:46Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > And the “thing” expression is no more correct for being common … just because everyone thinks so. \*\*Nametag \*\* … what’s “correct” got to do with it? As far as language goes, what’s common and understood _is_ fully legitimate on that basis alone. The analogy with “Louie Louie”. The lyrics to “Louie Louie” can be and have cofidied. This never truly happens with a language at large – there is no one arbiter of correctness. Language happens on a constantly _ad hoc_ basis between flesh-and-blood speakers, and this creates all kinds of shifts over time (though mass media tends to slow some effects down). Language does not happen in the OED, or in Strunk & White. Everyone (more or less) tacitly agreeing that a given element of language is correct is exactly how language changes naturally. The English you speak and write every day is formed of nothing more than the cumulative errors of speakers gone by … all the way back to the first caveman who could grunt. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/36 "2004-06-11T16:06:11Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > It seems like there’s a huge mental disconnect here. Can somebody please tell me that, even if they’ve always heard “thing”, they can at least see the logic in what I am trying to say? I understand it perfectly well. However, if you think this is enough to convince me that it’s the only acceptable form of the expression then you’ve got another…er…well, you know. It doesn’t bother me a bit if other people want to say “another think coming”, but “another thing” seems too widespread to be considered a mispronounciation rather than an alternate version of the expression. “Another thing” seems as logical as “another think” to me, even if it alters the meaning of the expression. But reflecting on times when I’ve used the phrase myself, “If that’s what you think, you’re in for a surprise” is closer to my intended meaning than “If that’s what you think, you should consider the matter again” anyway. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/37 "2004-06-11T16:10:21Z")
:smack: Errrr … beginning of paragraph 2 above: **"The analogy with “Louie Louie”. The lyrics to “Louie Louie” can be and have cofidied."** should read **"The analogy with “Louie Louie” doesn’t hold up. The lyrics to “Louie Louie” can and have been cofidied."** ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/38 "2004-06-11T16:33:39Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > :smack: > > Errrr … beginning of paragraph 2 above: > > **"The analogy with “Louie Louie”. The lyrics to “Louie Louie” can be and have cofidied."** > > should read > > **"The analogy with “Louie Louie” doesn’t hold up. The lyrics to “Louie Louie” can and have been cofidied."** Cofidied? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/39 "2004-06-11T16:34:14Z")
> [@](#): > > “When an informal poll was conducted here at Merriam-Webster, about 60% of our editors favored ‘thing’ over ‘think,’ a result that runs counter to our written evidence.” This horrifies me. What are these people doing editing a dictionary if they’re that retarded? Frankly, I tend to subtract an IQ point or two from my impression of a person when they say “another thing coming.” I consider it on a par with “mute point” or “nucular.” ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2004, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795/40 "2004-06-11T16:40:00Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > I’ve also never devoted much thought before to parsing the phrase “If you think X, then you’ve got another _thing_ coming”, but doing so just now I think the intended meaning is roughly “You may believe or expect X, but that is not what is really going to happen. What is really going to happen is something else.” Something else = another thing. As **Cheesesteak** mentioned, there may be the hint of a threat: “If you think I’m going to buy you a beer, you’ve got another thing coming [like a punch in the face].” No, something else = a thing. _Another_ thing, implies there is a first thing out there… where is it? What’s the first thing? That explanation ranks up there with “It’s a moo point, you know, like a cow’s opinion. It doesn’t matter. It’s ‘mooooooooooooo’” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reference-books-exist-people-mild-swear-free/249795.md?page=3)