Talk:besides

Meaning No. 3

I think "instead of" should be separated from "exept for". Just as the example demonstrates, that is not the same meaning. And perhaps the meanings should not just consist of synonyms and the synonyms should get their own section?

91.54.235.199 04:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

(obsolete) Beside

What meaning(s) of beside are obsolete for besides? In fact, the third meaning of beside reads "Besides; in addition to." --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:50, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

apart from

The entry of apart from says besides is one of its synonyms, is it right? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

http://oed.com/oed2/00010062 --Backinstadiums (talk) 09:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Backinstadiums:Yes, it's right. Separate matter: Can you explain how the example in your 5 August 2020‎ edit (i.e. "I have been to Spain, but nowhere besides") is in any way conjunctive? --Kent Dominic (talk) 10:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Kent Dominic: It isn't. The label was there before there was any example --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

except (for) is not a synonym

Besides is inclusive, whereas except is exclusive, so that Besides Larry, we'll invite John, Jake, and Rene means that Larry is also invited. --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Backinstadiums: "Everyone besides Larry was invited" would mean Larry was not. Equinox ◑ 21:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Equinox: Preposition 3. Other than, else than: in negative and interrogative (formerly sometimes in affirmative) sentences, capable of being rendered by ‘except, excluding.’ https://oed.com/oed2/00020842 (Cf. beside https://oed.com/oed2/00020841, except : Preposition †2. Leaving out of account; hence, in addition to, besides, as well as. Obs. rare. https://oed.com/oed2/00079534 ) --Backinstadiums (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Page 593 of the CambridgeGEL reads

[62] i) a. Kim too resigned. b. Only Kim resigned. ii) a. “Kim resigned” b. “Kim resigned” iii) a. “Someone besides Kim resigned” b. “No one except Kim resigned.”
Both [ia] and [ib] entail that Kim resigned: the obvious difference between additive too and restrictive only is shown in [iii]. But there is also a difference with respect to the status of the component propositions given in [ii–iii]. We saw that with only the main assertion is [iiib], with [iib] being backgrounded. With too, however, it is [iia] that is the main assertion, and [iiia] that is backgrounded. And in fact [iiia] (unlike [iib]) is not an entailment, not a truth condition, but merely a conventional implicature. The only scenario in which [ia] can be false is one where Kim didn’t resign. To see more easily that this is so, consider a situation in the future. You say Pat will sign the cheque and I respond Kim too will sign it. And suppose that in fact Pat does not sign, and only Kim does so: it is clear that the prediction I made will be judged to have turned out to be true, not false. Correlating with this is a difference with respect to negation. We have seen that negating [62ib] affects [iiib]: Not only Kim resigned says that there was someone else besides Kim who resigned. But we can’t negate [ia] so as to cancel [iiia], while leaving [iia] intact. ∗Not Kim too resigned is ungrammatical, and Kim too didn’t resign has too outside the scope of negation, so that the two components are “Kim didn’t resign” and “Someone besides Kim didn’t resign”. 

Also, "everybody" is a universal quantifier: http://www.glottopedia.org/index.php/Negative_polarity_item --Backinstadiums (talk) 12:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Backinstadiums: I have been speaking native English for 40 years. I don't know why you keep posting shitty textbook nonsense here. I know more than the textbook. I speak it. Equinox ◑ 08:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

calling the OED "shitty textbook nonsense" is audacious. --Backinstadiums (talk) 09:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Backinstadiums: Are you saying "everyone besides Larry was invited" means that Larry was invited? I challenged you to ask any English-speaker you know, and also all Wiktionarians, to confirm this. Do it. Do it and learn that the stuff that you autistically, boringly copy from textbooks isn't automatically correct. Will you do it? Equinox ◑ 09:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

[1] Equinox ◑ 10:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

____

@Backinstadiums, Equinox: Let me jump into the fray... This, from Merriam-Webster:

besides preposition

Definition of besides (Entry 1 of 3)

1: OTHER THAN, EXCEPT

// no one besides us

// Nothing besides a miracle could help them.

2: TOGETHER WITH

// a decision that, besides being practical, is morally right

From my own lexicon:

besides preposition

1. other than, in excess of, or beyond; Example: there was little else to discover besides an everlasting desire. (Compare except.)
2. together with what was mentioned in an immediately prior context; Example: “Tae Sung, why go for president, of all things?” Deborah piped. “Because I’m fed up with the way the economy has been going, and with all the trouble simmering in Northeast Asia,” T.S. replied. “Also, I want to build something we can pass along together. Besides all that, I feel I’d be making my father proud.” (Compare plus; see also on top of.)

[Notice how the definitions, but not the synonyms, can be swapped re. the two examples.]

So, I would interpret "Besides Larry, we'll invite John, Jake, and Rene" to mean that Larry is also invited according to M-W #2 and my definition #2. Prescriptively, I'd render it instead as "We'll invite John, Jake, and Rene besides Larry," which, IMHO, is unequivocally inclusive with "besides" as a periodic adverbial phrase instead of an incipital adverbial phrase. (I don't deem besides to be intrinsically inclusive or exclusive, as you'll notice from how my two definitions' meanings differ pretty radically. And I'll spare you the definitions for those two grammatical terms unless you can't figure them out on your own.)

I would interpret "Everyone besides Larry was invited" to mean Larry was not invited according to M-W #1 and my definition #1, but I wouldn't be nonplussed to learn the opposite had been intended. The prescriptivist in me would rather see it written parenthetically as "Everyone, besides Larry, was invited." In that case I'd be certain Larry wasn't invited. (Sorry I can't give you an audio rendering of how I'd offer the spoken differences between the two.) For me, the key distinction isn't vocab; it's context and prosody.

Re. context, affirmative versus negative content can be a dead giveaway: "Besides January, two other months start with the the letter 'J'" fairly obviously entails besides in an inclusive sense as indicated by the affirmation that ensues. "Besides February, no other month starts with the letter 'F'" pretty obviously entails besides in an exclusive sense as indicated by the negation that ensues. --Kent Dominic (talk) 09:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

P.S. I 100% agree that Equinox is audacious. Nonetheless, I'd sooner rely on his instincts and ability than on OED's. He's not right 100% of the time (esp. when he disagrees with me!) but I'd say he's more sensible than OED, whose editors need plainspoken English remediation to cure them of inbred linguisticitis and ipse dixital diarrhea. --Kent Dominic (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)