Reply
Sun 30 Aug, 2009 07:46 pm
The grammar looks simple, but I am not sure about its nuance:
"We just simply don't have a lot to go on," Doering said. "I'm not going to tell people not to be cautious. Until we know exactly what happened and who did it, that's not going to change."
Did Doering mean: "We just simply don't have a lot to go on talking about the case"? And this "not-talkng-much-about-it" is not going to change? By this I mean, "that" in "that's not going to change" refers to "We just simply don't have a lot to go on talking about the case".
Am I on the right track?
Context:
Police have not released the victims' names or said how they died in the home on an old plantation, nestled among centuries-old, moss-draped oak trees in coastal southeast Georgia. Doering defended his vague statements about the case, saying he didn't want the public to know details that might compromise what he called a "tedious" investigation.
"We just simply don't have a lot to go on," Doering said. "I'm not going to tell people not to be cautious. Until we know exactly what happened and who did it, that's not going to change."
Mary Strickland, who owns The Georgia Pig, a popular local barbecue place said people have been buzzing about the killings and mainly want to know what happened.
More:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-29-ga-mobile-home-deaths_N.htm
We don't have a lot to go on.....as far as evidence and/or facts about the case.
That's not going to change......about telling people to be cautious.
That is, until there is more evidence and/or facts about this case, he is going to continue to tell people to be cautious.
"We just simply don't have a lot to go on," Doering said.
To "go on" is an idiomatic phrasal verb, meaning in this case, roughly, "proceed". When police investigating a case have many clues, they have plenty to go on; an early arrest is foreseen. When they have few clues, they have not much to go on. Thus Doering is saying they have few clues.
Therefore, he uses a double negative construction to emphasise his caution and to signal to his listeners that high expectations are inappropriate, and that continued caution is necessary:
"I'm not going to tell people not to be cautious..."
"...Until we know exactly what happened and who did it, "
... And furthermore, presumably, can tell the public that there is no danger of a repetition, because whoever "did it" is dead, incapacitated, or under arrest...
"...that's not going to change."
Until then, the advice to be cautious will continue to be in force.
Every section of Doering's announcement is expressed in negatives. Not much to go on; no relaxation of caution, until more clues, no change.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace