Talk:by thunder
Add topicLatest comment: 6 years ago by Equinox in topic Intensifier?
Links
[edit]- https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/73846/what-does-by-thunder-or-what-in-thunder-mean-here
- https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100919224130AAAsQ2C
Can we do anything with these? I can't find much else. Adam9007 (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Intensifier?
[edit]The first quote may be an intensifier (like by God), but I'm not sure. Adam9007 (talk)
- It is. I can't make sense of the Harry Potter one: not enough text given. Equinox ◑ 19:32, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Equinox: They're both Harry Potter. As for the second quote, the book goes on to describe the character's movement, and he then says 'See what they've named themselves?', so I'm 99 per cent sure it's an expression of shock. Adam9007 (talk) 19:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Quoting HP twice seems a bit silly. Must be plenty of good older sources by different authors at different periods... Equinox ◑ 19:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Equinox: Well, the links above provide some other sources, but I don't have access to them. But if the meanings are different, maybe it isn't so silly.
I say if, because I can replace "by thunder" in the first quote with "my God" (an expression of shock), and it'll still make sense. Maybe it's both?EDIT: Hang on, that's apparently also used for emphasis... Adam9007 (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Equinox: Well, the links above provide some other sources, but I don't have access to them. But if the meanings are different, maybe it isn't so silly.
- I just don't think the 2003 cite "means"/conveys anything as stated: it's a sentence fragment. We can look at the definition and think "oh, so that's the communicational purpose it's supposed to serve" but there's no way to read "excellent, Dolores, and by thunder" and have any clue what's going on. (Separately, and ignorably, I think that such a long-established phrase, not a recent newspaper invention, should be evidenced by long-standing old texts and not a recent kids' book, but that's my snobbery, and I could fix it myself, haha. Perhaps when I finish some other projects.) Equinox ◑ 03:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Equinox: Actually, I think it does make sense. The "..." implies he was about to say something else before he noticed something and was shocked by it. Also, I've listened to the audiobook many times, and if I remember correctly he definitely said it in shock (he certainly sounded shocked when he said it). At least, I think that's the impression Stephen Fry gave. Do I need to give a longer quote? The current one is quoted exactly as it appears in (at least my copy of) the book. Adam9007 (talk) 04:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- I just don't think the 2003 cite "means"/conveys anything as stated: it's a sentence fragment. We can look at the definition and think "oh, so that's the communicational purpose it's supposed to serve" but there's no way to read "excellent, Dolores, and by thunder" and have any clue what's going on. (Separately, and ignorably, I think that such a long-established phrase, not a recent newspaper invention, should be evidenced by long-standing old texts and not a recent kids' book, but that's my snobbery, and I could fix it myself, haha. Perhaps when I finish some other projects.) Equinox ◑ 03:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- You realise that people come here trying to learn English and the fact that you have listened to the audiobook many times will not help them in understanding the isolated text fragment "excellent Dolores and by thunder"? I'm a native speaker and I can't grasp the meaning from that fragment. I mean I will bookmark this page myself to come back and add some real cites later (tho' I'm strongly focused on creating new entries for entirely missing words) but if you are in doubt then please take it to a general discussion page. I don't think that Dolores cite is acceptable at all! -- Having ranted: thanks for bothering to do any citing though. It's always a start. Equinox ◑ 04:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)