Talk:not be an option


 * This sounds very SOP to me; would you object to me RFD'ing it? PUC – 10:05, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No, go ahead. Imetsia (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

RFD discussion: October 2021–January 2022
Sounds SOP. PUC – 11:39, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as SOP, but create an entry for the interjection, not an option. bd2412 T 04:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That is not an option; “not an option” is not an interjection. --Lambiam 11:01, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You need to get out more. bd2412 T 01:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Is “liar” an interjection? Or ? --Lambiam 02:20, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Surely it is as much of an interjection as, e.g., fuck off. bd2412 T 07:00, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * So do you propose we list terms such as, and  also as entries under a header Interjection?  --Lambiam 07:33, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Given that "no comment" is listed as a phrase, "not an option" seems entirely plausible by comparison, perhaps also as a phrase; "objection" is obviously sometimes used as an interjection, particularly when people engage in faux legal discourse. In actual legal practice, it is literally an interjection, as it is intentionally interjected into a course of questioning thought to be legally improper. bd2412 T 22:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I tentatively conclude that you agree these terms should not be listed under a header Interjection. --Lambiam 16:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * A phrase can primarily be used as an interjection; and, obviously, an interjection can be a phrase. The existence of two correct alternatives does not diminish the correctness of either. The fact that we list no can do and no chance and not for the world as interjections (though, oddly, not a chance is listed as an adverb), when "not an option" is used functionally identically to all three phrases suggests that it would be appropriate as an interjection. Of course, objection as used in a legal colloquy is, as noted, literally interjected. bd2412 T 02:21, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * By the way, to be clear, I am not talking about the phrase as used as part of a sentence like "failure is not an option" or "quitting is not an option" or "that's not an option", but as a complete standalone response, particularly where whatever is being asked of the user is an option, but the user is indicating refusal to accept it as one, as in:
 * 2003, Sandra Brown, Hello, Darkness, p. 72: Should he send Gavin back to his mother? "Not an option," he muttered out loud.
 * 2009, Maria Lima, Matters of the Blood, p. 311: "And leave you—the two of you—to die? Not an option."
 * 2010, Catherine Jinks, The Genius Wars, p. 188: Saul shook his head. “Not an option,” he said flatly.
 * These are elliptic for “that is not an option”, similar to “Good enough, court says” and ‘&thinsp;“Unbelievable,” he said.’ This can be done in speech with virtually any complement of the copula. “Knock, knock. Who’s there? Seasonal depression!” IMO this does not justify classifying the term  as an interjection. --Lambiam 08:10, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * How is this different from saying that no chance or not a chance is elliptic for "there is no chance" or "there is not a chance"? If "no chance" is an interjection, how can a synonym with similar construction and basically identical usage be a different part of speech? Also, is your objection to having an entry for not an option as an interjection, of for having such an entry at all, no matter the part of speech assigned? bd2412 T 17:29, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

My objection was specifically to the proposal for creating an entry for the phrase as an interjection. I don‘t think I‘d be in favour of an entry at all, though, because I am inclined to think this remains a transparent sum of parts. As to no change being elliptic for there is no chance, the following mini dialogue does not appear natural to me. “Tom—Might this work? Dick—There is no chance!” --Lambiam 03:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Either keep or move to not an option. --Fytcha (talk) 11:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not too impressed by a word or phrase being used as an interjection as there are way too many of them and the criteria seem hopelessly vague. Interjections can be easily expressed with a "!" ("Wait!") or explicitly such as in '"Wait," she interjected as he described his plan.' Does "Doubt it", simply short for "I doubt it", count as an interjection? What about "No doubt" ("There is no doubt about what you are saying")? Cheers, Facts707 (talk) 12:15, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Or “Told you so!”. Grammatically these are interjections, but not lexically, which is what should concern us here. --Lambiam 09:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there anything in Category:English interjections that doesn't fail that test? bd2412 T 15:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yessiree! --Lambiam 09:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you think, then, that no chance and no can do are currently incorrectly listed as interjections? bd2412 T 02:19, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - pretty much the definition of SOP. BigDom 09:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as SOP. - excarnateSojourner (talk|contrib) 21:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Imetsia (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Svartava2 (talk) 15:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, pretty straightforward. The keep votes don't even have arguments, what the hell!? DAVilla 05:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * What do you think of not an option as an option for an entry? <i style="background:lightgreen">bd2412</i> T 20:41, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd have to give it more consideration, but the reasons so far don't seem compelling to me. DAVilla 21:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep AG202 (talk) 22:01, 19 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete: option = "one of a set of choices that can be made". Not an option just means it's not a viable or permissible choice. Equinox ◑ 01:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete too literal. – Jberkel 10:29, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

RFD-deleted, reopen if objection —<u style="color:#E21F1F; font-variant:small-caps; font-size:120%;">Svārtava <sup style="font-size:80%;">[t•c•u•r] 12:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This one is a pity. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 12:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Fytcha what do you mean? This has been here for a considerably long time, even you have cast your vote. —<u style="color:#E21F1F; font-variant:small-caps; font-size:120%;">Svārtava <sup style="font-size:80%;">[t•c•u•r] 13:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That it's a pity that the entry was deleted, albeit by consensus. My comment is directed at the consensus, not the closing procedure. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:16, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Fytcha Ah, okay. I implemented only the consensus; see my own vote. Could you please delete it? —<u style="color:#E21F1F; font-variant:small-caps; font-size:120%;">Svārtava <sup style="font-size:80%;">[t•c•u•r] 13:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)