Zompist Bboard Again

Unrelated question:

Does anyone here know the origin of the construction "We do X so you don't have to"? Used, for instance, in internet posts that say things like "We watched this latest movie [everyone is talking about] [that you probably wouldn't enjoy] so you don't have to". I tried using search engines to answer this question, but got no useful results.

My speculation is that it started when some bank or other financial institution ran an ad campaign with a slogan that said something like "We worry about your money so you don't have to", but that's just guesswork on my part.

It's pretty old. There's a website that's basically The Onion but specifically about Catholic things called Eye of the Tiber (defunct in November 2020 it seems!), and I found this Reddit post from October 2012 where it's clear the tagline "Breaking Catholic news so you don't have to" was already being used. I don't know if they chose that tagline because the meme phrase may have been new or not, but at least this gives us a "terminus ante quem".

Isn't it from the Nostalgia Critic? "I remember it so you don't have to." Wikipedia says he started making videos in 2007, but I'm not sure when he started using that catchphrase.

(he might have himself been referencing something else, but I when I see the formula from internet users, I always assume it ultimately filtered down from him)

Your Google fu is weak, butterfly. Did you know you can search something like this?

"so you don't have to" before:2010-01-01

In any case, you're both way off. Here's a Dow "Scrubbing Bubbles" ad from 1973 that has the tagline "We do the work... so you don't have to."

Thank you all! And no, I didn't know that.

Richard W wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 11:59 am

(Note that ‘need’ as an auxiliary verb is very rare in modern English, and almost always people will just say It never needs to change.)

Except that 'need not' is not rare as an auxiliary, where it functions as one negative of 'must' and as one negative of 'may'; without abbreviation, writing does not distinguish the negatives 'may not'/mayn't and 'may not', unlike 'cannot' and 'can not'.

What does the phrase in bold mean, please? Sorry for my poor English.XD I think I can analyze the sentence construction but still I can't understand what it means. Could you please explain more or provide some sentence examples? Thank you.

...writing does not distinguish the negatives 'may not'/mayn't and 'may not', unlike 'cannot' and 'can not'

For some auxiliaries, the structure AUX+not+VERB can have two meanings. In the first, it negates the auxiliary, and in the second it negates the verb. In these cases, if 'not' contracts with the auxiliary, it negates the auxiliary. So, You mayn't attend means your attendance is forbidden or impossible. On the other hand, You may not attend can mean that your attendance is optional or not certain to happen. The second is the likeliest meaning in We may not have enough money.. Without the contraction, one has to listen carefully to the phrasing of the construction to know the meaning.

Similarly, I cannot mend it means that I am not able to mend it. On the other hand, I can not mend it means I feel no compulsion to mend it, but can just leave it in a damaged state. The second would be the likeliest meaning of a peacemaker saying You could not throw stones at them.

To put it another way, "cannot" is 不能 and "can not" is 能不, but "may not" is ambiguous between 不可以 (and maybe 不可能, if you force it, though it's not very natural) and 可以不/可能不 (both of which meanings are very natural). "Mayn't" is only 不可以/不可能 (but it doesn't exist in my dialect).

Richard W wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 1:43 pm The second is the likeliest meaning in We may not have enough money.. Without the contraction, one has to listen carefully to the phrasing of the construction to know the meaning.

Actually, I'm wrong. If the first meaning is implausible, there may be a contraction. We mayn't have enough money will be interpreted as the second meaning, i.e. 'It is possible that we don't [or "won't"] have enough money'.

Just a note: I've never seen mayn't in my life...

Kuchigakatai wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 6:17 pm Just a note: I've never seen mayn't in my life...

*Mayn't isn't a word in the English I know.

Okay, I think I've got it. I actually know nothing about it at all (; furthermore, it has been more than 40 years since I started learning English at the 7th grade Regarding that my listening is now still as poor as a high school student, I think I'd better, when necessary, choose to communicate with Satan in a written form, not in an oral one if he can't speak Chinese. XD

Summary:
You can {not eat} it
= You can choose not to eat it.

You {cannot} eat it
=You are not allowed to eat it.

Q: How about if "can't"? I guess
You can't eat it.
=You cannot eat it.

And how about "mustn't" and "must not"? Do they follow the same interpretation?

You must not go to the meeting.
=?
You mustn't go to the meeting.
=You are forbidden to go to the meeting.


P.S. @willm: thank you for your consideration. Would you (and anyone else as well) like to practice your Chinese? If you open a thread and practice there, I'll provide my help.

*Mustn't is not part of my dialect either, but I am aware of its existence in other English varieties, unlike *mayn't, whose existence I only know from Richard W's posts in this thread.

"Can't" is equivalent to "cannot".

"Must" works differently. "Mustn't" and "must not" are equivalent, and they both mean that something is forbidden. If you want to say that something is not necessary, you can use (from most to least formal) "need not", "needn't", or "don't need to". I think "needn't" is more common in British English than American English, but I'm American and I use it sometimes.

And thank you for your offer! I may well take you up on that.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:38 pm *Mustn't is not part of my dialect either, but I am aware of its existence in other English varieties, unlike ...

Travis, would you please delete the part after "unlike"?
I think you've said it very clearly, and your opinion has been also supported by Kuchi. I guess you don't mean it, but your repetition might introduce a possible misunderstanding that you are being against one of our members on purpose...

"Mayn't" definitely exists, but it sounds super old fashioned. I'd expect to find it in early 20th century (and older) british books, but I wouldn't be surprised there's still some people who use it in actual speech.

azhong wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 8:49 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:38 pm *Mustn't is not part of my dialect either, but I am aware of its existence in other English varieties, unlike ...

Travis, would you please delete the part after "unlike"?
I think you've said it very clearly, and your opinion has been also supported by Kuchi. I guess you don't mean it, but your repetition might introduce a possible misunderstanding that you are being against one of our members on purpose...

I was just stating that I myself have never, ever heard *mayn't before Richard W mentioned it in this thread, that's all.

Darren wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 4:27 am "Mayn't" definitely exists, but it sounds super old fashioned. I'd expect to find it in early 20th century (and older) british books, but I wouldn't be surprised there's still some people who use it in actual speech.

I worked for a woman who used it, but she was old money back in Pennsylvania and had some Trans-Atlantic aspects in her idiolect. So take that as you will.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 10:17 am I was just stating that I myself have never, ever heard *mayn't before Richard W mentioned it in this thread, that's all.

Okay, it's not unusual for me to misunderstand an English passage, which Linguoboy can prove. And your explanation is indeed very helpful. XD. (Or I'll feel a bit guilty, too, for I am the one who initiated the discussion. But honestly I personaly perfer a homonic relationship to a very precise language knowledge.)

azhong wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:23 pmOkay, it's not unusual for me to misunderstand an English passage, which Linguoboy can proveconfirm. And your explanation is indeed very helpful. XD. (Or I'llI'd feel a bit guilty, too, forbecause I'm the one who initiated the discussion. But honestly I personally prefer a harmonic relationship to a very precise language knowledge.)

The conjunction "for" is rather literary; using it in an informal discussion sounds stilted. Using the phrase "for I am the one" sounds very stilted.