When first is second, who’s on First?

MONDAY, JUNE 28, 2010


When first is second, who’s on First?

This is not an exercise waiting in long lines to buy an iPhone. It has nothing to do with Matthew 20:16: “So the last shall be first, and the first last.” Hardly ever does that happen and almost never is second first. But very frequently first is second. It has more to do with people or more accurately person. It is a grammar and usage thing.


Even I’m confused now. If you think you are first, second, last or confused, read a few more paragraphs.

This may bring on an Ah-Ha moment for some. Especially married folks, kids, people in long term relationships and of course pet owners. For the pets though instead of Ah-Ha we often end up with “What the Heck?” but we can never be sure. DakotaDawg, possibly not so much. Nevertheless I continue to have suspicions.

Let’s mow the lawn only maybe on the very odd occasion means that everyone in the house is going to run outside, start up the mower and line up behind it taking turns on the north, south, east and west legs of its mind-numbing journey.

“Let’s” is a lot like “We should” or, “We ought to” in a not so Abbot and Costello kind of way. Ask any teenager to translate these first person plural imperatives for you. Almost every time the definitive answer is second person.

So the true definition of something as straight forward as person can depend entirely on context or possibly the person being used by whichever person is using whatever person they are using, no matter how they intend to use it or them. Maybe that is a bit too much Abbot and Costello for this post.


“Who’s Harvey?”
“A white rabbit, six feet tall.”
”Six feet? ”
”Six feet three and a half inches. Now let’s stick to the facts. ”


For the teen, first person plural imperatives become second person singular imperatives or second person plural imperatives primarily depending upon context and circumstances. If a single teen is the only young person within earshot and a parent has just used the “We should”, “We ought to” or “We must” suggestive phrases; for the teen that automatically translates into “You will” in the uniquely singular sense. If there are siblings or friends present when the command guised as a suggestion is posed, normally it is translated in the “You will” plural sense of the command that follows what only the naïve might think is a suggestion. The second can be first here and also second (sometimes as ruled by circumstances and context) if there are several younger people present but the parent is staring directly into the eyes of only one of the kids, especially menacingly. In this case, Robert De Niro would ask, “You talking to me?” which is obviously an example of second being second. This question generally clears up intent and meaning if not malice.

Wiki even gets a little confused simply on the straight grammar of it all not including any nuances, context or circumstances. They try to blame the Romans, then the French or Spanish. These people are at the heart of the romance languages… exactly where a lot of English got mixed up. Our language is in some crazy love affair, a Ménage à Trois or worse. We won’t even bother to talk about Hebrew, Japanese or Mandarin that Wiki tries to drag into things. Or any Nordic languages which Wiki completely ignores. This only complicate factors further.


A spade is a spade. A rose is still a rose. Even so, things are extremely muddled in English. Wiki tries to pass it off in terms of word order and adding the word you. Heck, we are talking about first being second where the word ‘you’ is not even used even if implied. Like so many things Wiki, they just got it wrong or head down some other obscure avenue trying to divert the readers with EOADD or AOADD.

So on first being second; Wiki barely touches the surface. Affirmative Indicative and Affirmative Imperative / Affirmative Prohibitive OR Negative Indicative and Negative Imperative / Negative Prohibitive… seriously, go to the Wiki for Imperative mood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperative_mood and see if you can make any sense of it at all. I have caught DakotaDawg with the key logger going back to this URL over and over and over. Now I know why she really prefers the Hochdeutsch to any of this nonsense.

For a few days I was trying to work on her pluperfect. On this I threw up my hands and sent away for the Rosetta Stone. Until it arrives I am relying heavily on the Google Gadget on my homepage for translations from English into German.

DakotaDawg though is a big fan of the "Let’s, We should or We ought to" line of reasoning. She says Let’s but frequently means YOU. I didn’t think we should get into that until we had the full set of DVD’s here and several slammed into the different computers all over the house.

DakotaDawg forged ahead. I now know her non-verbal command and its translation for: Let’s have a treat! It is when she sits on ‘her rug’ next to the dining room table and lets her tongue almost drag on the floor. Without Google or Rosetta Stone I figured out that that means: “You go over to the cookie jar and get me a treat.” “NOW.”


When first is second DakotaDawg is on her rug. I have no idea who’s on third.

I just know DakotaDawg is first.

Kommen Sie hier, bitte!
Setzen Sie sich auf Ihren Teppich.
Ich werde Ihnen eine Festlichkeit.
Sie sind ein sehr gutes Mädchen!
Wir sind sehr gut heute!

DakotaDog ist auf zuerst!


Translated back with Google:

Come here, please!
Sit on your carpet.
I will give you a treat.
You are a very good girl!
We are very good today!

DakotaDog is on first!

Very close but no bananas compared to what I asked them to say originally. I guess no matter what, some of it is Lost in Translation.

© 06.28.2010 steven d philbrick SR+ DakotaDawg


POSTED BY SRPLUS AT 6:39 AM