Language desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 21 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 23 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
My experience with the phrase is different than that shown below. I reckon that a force not to be reckoned with is a force you want to avoid. So it is not inconsequential, but instead considered (i.e. reckoned) to result in a bad consequence. My understanding of "reckoning" is that it mean's thinking, deciding, considering, or estimating and the phrase "reckoned with" means dealing with or addressing or thinking about or experiencing the consequences of a problem, issue, or event. It is not that you must deal with it, but that you are dealing with it.
I understand the phrase "to be reckoned with" means something that must be considered or dealt with, but does "not to be reckoned with" suggest something which is too significant/big to deal with (a force one cannot hope to influence), or something which is too insignificant to deal with (a force of no consequence).
The phrase mostly seems to be used to suggest the former, but the natural interpretation seems to me to be the latter one. I've been staring at this for too long though. It is ambiguous right?
89.100.64.193 ( talk) 16:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Definitely a phrase that can mean two quite opposite things. Makes me want to channel Edward Gibbon. "The question of the nature of the Trinity is a matter not to be reckoned with, the question being so entirely out of proportion to the mind of man." - Jmabel | Talk 02:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
There is one oddity about "not to be reckoned with". "To be reckoned with" means you have to take something into consideration. "Not to be reckoned with" sounds like you have to NOT take something into consideration, i.e. you HAVE TO ignore it. That doesn't seem right. A better way to say it would be, "Need not be reckoned with." ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Language desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 21 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 23 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
My experience with the phrase is different than that shown below. I reckon that a force not to be reckoned with is a force you want to avoid. So it is not inconsequential, but instead considered (i.e. reckoned) to result in a bad consequence. My understanding of "reckoning" is that it mean's thinking, deciding, considering, or estimating and the phrase "reckoned with" means dealing with or addressing or thinking about or experiencing the consequences of a problem, issue, or event. It is not that you must deal with it, but that you are dealing with it.
I understand the phrase "to be reckoned with" means something that must be considered or dealt with, but does "not to be reckoned with" suggest something which is too significant/big to deal with (a force one cannot hope to influence), or something which is too insignificant to deal with (a force of no consequence).
The phrase mostly seems to be used to suggest the former, but the natural interpretation seems to me to be the latter one. I've been staring at this for too long though. It is ambiguous right?
89.100.64.193 ( talk) 16:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Definitely a phrase that can mean two quite opposite things. Makes me want to channel Edward Gibbon. "The question of the nature of the Trinity is a matter not to be reckoned with, the question being so entirely out of proportion to the mind of man." - Jmabel | Talk 02:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
There is one oddity about "not to be reckoned with". "To be reckoned with" means you have to take something into consideration. "Not to be reckoned with" sounds like you have to NOT take something into consideration, i.e. you HAVE TO ignore it. That doesn't seem right. A better way to say it would be, "Need not be reckoned with." ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)