Has DH got another think coming or have I got another thing coming???

Think. For certain.

Surely the grammatically correct word in that sentence would be thought, DadDadDad - that being the noun, whereas think is a verb?

PS - I do hope it wasn't you, as you are, as has been proven, quite correct)

I always used to think it was thing, until I saw it written as think, and realised I had been wrong.

Think just makes more sense.

So (getting back to the OP) who ended up doing the garden, NotMy?

This is a really interesting thread, psychologically speaking.

It shows how people, once they've been shown to be wrong, would rather change the world than their own minds (which should be infinitely easier but demonstrably impossible).

Blimey if you lot really think it's thing, then you've got another think coming.

STDG - I disagree with you that think is grammatically incorrect, it's perfectly acceptable as a noun in that phrase.

I also disagree that you can't justify "another thing", as I explained a few minutes ago.

But I do agree that think is correct.

sorry daddaddad but it is entirely nonsensical. Bats, even.

Another think coming

How can it be 'another' thing, when there isn't a first thing in the sentence.

There is a first thought - 'If you think that, you have another think coming'.

Ie. I have had a thought - but because it is incorrect, I have to replace it with the second, correct thought - so you have a first and second thought in the sentence. The second 'think' in the phrase is grammatically incorrect, but is an idiomatic usage.

Damp squid! BRILLIANT

Another thing coming

hackmum - your explanation above doesn't account for what the word "another" is doing there.

OK, I've thought about that and I'll give it a go...

Look at this sentence: We should think about doing X, but that's a topic for another day. It talks about another day even though at that point no day has been referenced, so what's that "another" doing there? Surely the answer is that it is implied, that today is one day, and by contrast this topic is being deferred to a day that is not today.

So equally, if we say "if you think X, you've got another thing coming" (for anyone joining the conversation, yes, I know thing is wrong), then the implication could be, that there was this thing X you were thinking about, well X is not going to happen, there is going to be some other thing - so that would be "another thing." Flawed, but not entirely nonsensical.

Ohhhh heh, sorry squoosh. That makes a lot more sense then, and I don't even need to know anything about the fb thread to be able to say that

Holger squoosh was copy-pasting things from the Facebook thread.

Holger - I agree with everything you say (well, except the hungry bit as I was taken out for quite a filling lunch ). That is why the eggcorn database is so fascinating - to see how people mishear, reinterpret and come up with wrong alternatives that can make a quirky or beautiful kind of sense. eggcorns.lascribe.net/browse-eggcorns/

It makes (some) sense to me and others (even after I have fully conceded that think is the right choice), so that is why I am suggesting you dial back your rather strident tone in saying that it makes absolutely no sense (implication: "as it makes no sense to me, I am not prepared to accept that it makes any sense to anyone else - not even to someone who is graciously admitting that their sense is flawed").

In the same way that "would of" makes sense to some, because it sounds like "would've," I suppose.

Even though it's WRONG!

Damp squid, escape goat, 'thing' vs. 'thing', these are all good examples of how we're constantly filling in the blanks of what we think things mean. Yes they sort of make sense, especially once you think that's what the saying is, because your brain thinks up a rationale for the saying. But that doesn't make them correct.

I don't mind ignorance, I'm well aware that there are lots of things I know little to nothing about, and I don't hold it against others the same way I wouldn't want it held against me, but yes, I have to say wilful ignorance irritates me too. Once you know what the idiom actually is, and its origins, why on earth would you persist in using an inferior, and wrong, version?

Sqoosh I'm not actually sure that accounts for much of the misunderstanding as I'm sure plenty, if not all, of the people on this thread know that it's something/anything not somethink/anythink. But I suppose it could be part of it in some cases.

Anyway I have been twitching far too much over this so I think I'm going to go do something else for a while.

I'm hungry.

DadDadDad: I understand that it makes sense to you. I just don't understand why - your explanation above doesn't account for what the word "another" is doing there.

I suppose "damp squid" makes sense in some way to the friend I heard use it the other day. Perhaps she thinks a damp squid is somehow less effective than a fully wet one.

I gave an indication of how it makes sense in brackets in my previous post, and others have had a go at justifying it on this thread, so I'm not really going to go over that again.

You seem to be missing my point: as I and other have used it for years, it clearly made some sense to us, and we can explain some of that sense, even if there are flaws in that explanation, as you point out.

So, I'm just objecting to what is coming across as an arrogant statement that "thing" makes NO sense at all. It does make some sense - that's what makes eggcorns like this interesting - even if ultimately it is wrong.

But DadDadDad, how does "thing" make sense? In order to have "another thing" coming, you must have a first thing. What did you imagine the first thing was?

It's definitely THINK

I feel physically sick now. I've always said thing . But I can see that I was wrong. I would have chosen thing in a quiz every time. Thank goodness for the anonymous internet so I don't have to hang my head in shame for too long!