"must not be" from the Kitchen Debate

[nekocat]

This is from the famous Kitchen Debate fought between Khrushchev and Nixon. Which of the following does "must not" mean in Nixon's sentence?

(1) The Soviet top officials ought not to be afraid of ideas.
(2) The Soviet top officials are seemingly not being afraid of ideas.
(3) Anybody, whether he be Russian or American, ought not to be afraid of ideas.​

KHRUSHCHEV
We always knew that Americans were smart people. Stupid people could not have risen to the economic level that they've reached. But as you know, "we don't beat flies with our nostrils!" In 42 years we've made progress.
NIXON
You must not be afraid of ideas.

 

[Geostigma]

"You must not be afraid of ideas" means that the Soviet officials cannot be afraid of ideas or no progress will be made. "Ought not to be" has softer implications, something along the lines of "should not be".

Must not be = if not, then without a doubt no progress will be made.

Ought not to be = if not, then probably no progress will be made.


I probably explained that pretty poorly, so if you need more I will be happy to try again. lol

 

[Mars Man]

I kind of wonder, nekocat san, just what you can make of that from the context itself.

Under the assumption that your level of English is proficient enough to understand the running dialog there (as provided by that site) with all its small cultural nuances that play a role, and all, which choice would you chose? MM

 

[nekocat]

You explained it quite clearly, geostigma-san! You're so great! But what I don't get myself to understand is, what makes you rule out the possibility of the so called "epistemic 'must'"?

You must be kidding!
You must know the truth. Why don't you tell it to me?​

 

[Mars Man]

nekocat san, is there any particular reason as to why you chose to overlook my question? Or, are you taking your time considering it? I would hope to hear from you on what I had asked; please. MM

 

[nekocat]

I kind of wonder, nekocat san, just what you can make of that from the context itself.
Under the assumption that your level of English is proficient enough to understand the running dialog there (as provided by that site) with all its small cultural nuances that play a role, and all, which choice would you chose? MM

Well I have a lot more learning to do to be able to write or speak perfect English.
I have most of the time no problem with reading English materials, but otherwise I'm yet on the long journey.

As I learned that there are two meanings of "must": the deontic and epistemic usage. Unfortunately I've not yet been given the 巻物 (secret roll) that will tell me how to distinguish one from the other. Thus I've got three options with which I can't decide on. Do the following usage of "must" sound archaic to your ear?

(1) "Has she gone deaf! She must hear it."

(2) "You can't taste the garlic in that sweet roll? That's impossible. You must taste it!"

(3) "Can you hear the battle?" She shook her head. "Only the wind …" "More than wind! Sword strikes … horses at the gallop … shouting. You must hear it."​

Could I band-wagon on this occasion and ask one more question? What does the "running" mean in one of your sentences? Is it something like "going on"?

 

[Mars Man]

Thank you for that notation, nekocat san. I will yet say that the question I had asked in my first post above has been overlooked, in that you have explained your understanding of grammatical definitions and functions without providing your interpretation for the OP's example.

I will not push it, though.

Nekocat san--the jest of my desire in that first post was to encourage you to do what many learners of English here, in the Japanese education system--and often enough outside of it even--don't do; and that is use English, rather than question or disect it.

You are fairly well-known, I might say, in some circles for your question asking. That, in and of itself, may not be any crime at all, however it can be said to be somewhat self-defeating at a certain point.

Very similar to the example of learning being the ice cream that is to fill an icecream cone--where at first, a little comparatively fills a large space, which increase diminishes as the cone is filled (e.g. n amount of ice cream fills less of the cone as the overall volume of ice cream increases)--questions loose their range of effect as the learning increases.

I would suggest that rather than simply asking a question, and then thanking someone for an answer on that, that you answer your own question along with an argument supporting your understanding, and then 'testing' that by your presentation of it. This really appears to be the level of English Language Learning that you are at, nekocat san. Why not step out of the constrained classroom of overloaded grammatical explanation, and into the world of pragmatic usage? Why not challenge yourself to even higher, more impressive areas...I feel that with some drive, patience, and help, you can do just that !! Your English level is very good !!

You see what I mean? You have correctly interpreted my usage of 'running' by a pragmatic, 'live-usage' analysis of the context of my communication. That is exactly what I am talking about; and you can do it just fine--without having to exactly ask a question. The scroll (巻物) is the context, and in my post, 'running's being used as it was with the term 'dialog' leads to the logical contextual interpretation of 'on going' (as in continuing)--and that is exactly what you understood there. SO...no need to ask a question. With confidence you understood it just fine.

You're a good student! Let's talk now !! MM

 

[nekocat]

the jest of my desire

Could I ask what it means?

Thank you for that notation, nekocat san. I will yet say that the question I had asked in my first post above has been overlooked, in that you have explained your understanding of grammatical definitions and functions without providing your interpretation for the OP's example.

What I was wondering was clearly expressed in #1. I couldn't decide on one from three possibilities that I could think of. That's the answer to your question on my part.

without providing your interpretation

??? My possible interpretation was clearly expressed in #1.

You are fairly well-known, I might say, in some circles for your question asking. That, in and of itself, may not be any crime at all, however it can be said to be somewhat self-defeating at a certain point.

I've never met with anyone outside of this forum who would challenge a person asking questions. On this forum I've already met two, you included, one of whom I've decided to put on ignore list. Administrator, as well as other kind and considerate members welcomed me to ask questions. I appreciate their kindness I've often heard from many sources that US education system, unlike that of Asian, African or European, highly value classmates in which students ask a lot of questions. Students even interrupt teachers in the middle of a class, which, one teacher said, unthinkable in European universities that he knew of.

What your hinting at sounds like conventional Asian way toward education.
I don't see it ideal. It also gives the impression that you deny us of intellectual activities that will strengthen our command of English. Don't you think asking English questions will merit not only the one who asked, but also other learners?

Very similar to the example of learning being the ice cream that is to fill an icecream cone--where at first, a little comparatively fills a large space, which increase diminishes as the cone is filled (e.g. n amount of ice cream fills less of the cone as the overall volume of ice cream increases)--questions loose their range of effect as the learning increases.

I'm sorry I couldn't see what you're trying to say by this metaphor.

I would suggest that rather than simply asking a question, and then thanking someone for an answer on that, that you answer your own question along with an argument supporting your understanding, and then 'testing' that by your presentation of it. This really appears to be the level of English Language Learning that you are at, nekocat san. Why not step out of the constrained classroom of overloaded grammatical explanation, and into the world of pragmatic usage? Why not challenge yourself to even higher, more impressive areas...I feel that with some drive, patience, and help, you can do just that !! Your English level is very good !!

Thanks, first let me express my gratitude for your suggestion.
Second, whether I do that is the matter of my privacy.
Third, I have a freedom of expression.
Please don't take it bad. I'm a learner just like one next door.

Forth, thanks for answering me to my question about "running." I learned another thing.

 

[Mars Man]

Thank you for your thoughts. I will not push some of the matters, because it really makes no big difference in many ways.

The expression 'jest' of some expression or talk or communication refers to the main, general thrust--or direction of point being made.

Those who acquire a language, very seldom do so by asking questions beyond a certain point. That is the natural way.

As far as the education system goes, regarding the English program here in Japan, I know it fairly well. Students are not as encouraged to use English as they are to technically know English.

My encouragement to you, is that you use English more !! Why question your own ability when it proves itself substantially enough?

Keep up the good work !! Come join us in the other areas of JREF !! MM

 

[anjusan]

Hi MM,

Did you perhaps mean 'gist' instead of 'jest'?

 

[Mars Man]

Well, you are most correct, anjusan !! Thanks for that careful eye there !! My apologies...that would have led a person on a wild goose chase for sure !!

Sorry about that nekocat san !! MM

 

[anjusan]

No problemo, MM. I, myself, always have to double check the spelling of that particular word, whenever I use it, because it doesn't sound like it is spelled.

 

[Sarapva]

I've often heard from many sources that US education system, unlike that of Asian, African or European, highly value classmates in which students ask a lot of questions. Students even interrupt teachers in the middle of a class, which, one teacher said, unthinkable in European universities that he knew of.
Don't you think asking English questions will merit not only the one who asked, but also other learners?

Yes, I think questions and answering are a good way to learn. As the questions are in English, you're also using English (in written form) at the same time. I think 50-60 years ago questions weren't encouraged much in U.S. schools, but now they are, especially in colleges and universities. It also depends on whether the teacher wants the students to ask questions (which I would think most teachers would).

And yes, when one person asks a question in a class, it's very likely there are a few others who have the same question.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

'Must not' is stronger than 'Ought not'. The word 'ought' is comparable to 'should' in many contexts, which is suggestive at best and usually used in conditional type sentences.

I would wager that 'You must not be afraid of ideas' lends itself to a strong overtone of something being necessary, even pre-requisite to another thing. Like 'in order to progress further as a society both socially and politically, it is necessary for you (the Soviets) to not be afraid of ideas'.

As for the mini-debate happening here, I'm not taking sides but objectively speaking it's impossible in my opinion to determine from the OP whether he did or didn't do his homework first and has come here as a last resort. He presented 3 choices which fit in his mind and he obviously needed further clarification, looks to me like he did consider the question before posting it.

 

[nekocat]

'Must not' is stronger than 'Ought not'. The word 'ought' is comparable to 'should' in many contexts, which is suggestive at best and usually used in conditional type sentences.
I would wager that 'You must not be afraid of ideas' lends itself to a strong overtone of something being necessary, even pre-requisite to another thing. Like 'in order to progress further as a society both socially and politically, it is necessary for you (the Soviets) to not be afraid of ideas'.

Thanks for your input, that's very informative!

As for the mini-debate happening here, I'm not taking sides but objectively speaking it's impossible in my opinion to determine from the OP whether he did or didn't do his homework first and has come here as a last resort. He presented 3 choices which fit in his mind and he obviously needed further clarification, looks to me like he did consider the question before posting it.

That's what the moderator barged in this thread for? Why wouldn't he send me PM instead if that were the motive? I don't think that's his intention. If that were the case, I wouldn't think that's what moderators should be doing--interupting one's thread and casting dark clouds upon a peaceful discussion.

 

[Mars Man]

To be honest--and those that know me would vouch for my being honest--I had not planned on posting again on this particular thread. Of course I have continued reading it. (as well as others too)

Unfortunately, perhaps, the development of statements on this thread has led me to reason that it would be good if I did post here again, so. . . I am posting here again. I would hope that those who may be interested, pay close attention and reason along with me chronologically, as well as logically.

Firstly, my first post (Aug. 2; 14:20--three min. after #2, 19 min. after OP) had asked nekocat san which one of the three choices she (and she is a she--I take it) would chose. She had provided three choices, asking which one (or more) was correct.

I kind of wonder, nekocat san, just what you can make of that from the context itself.

Under the assumption that your level of English is proficient enough to understand the running dialog there (as provided by that site) with all its small cultural nuances that play a role, and all, which choice would you chose? MM

In my #7 post I further explained the motivation behind my first post:

Nekocat san--the jest of my desire in that first post was to encourage you to do what many learners of English here, in the Japanese education system--and often enough outside of it even--don't do; and that is use English...I would suggest that ... you answer your own question along with an argument supporting your understanding, and then 'testing' that by your presentation of it.

Up to the point of my first post, I do not, in any reasonable manner, see how one could construe my intention as being of 'ill will' or as 'barging in' on a thread. In fact, I would very strongly argue against that assertion.

Secondly, as of very late Thursday night (actually Firday morning) nekocat san had replied to #2 (some 36 min. after I had posted #3) but had failed to reply to my post--although I know that she checked my profile on Thursday afternoon, so should have known that I was a teacher of English, and thus should (I would think) have trusted my purpose.

I therefore then posted asking, in polite enough a manner, why she had not answered. (giving a couple of possible scenarios that could be reasons too) She then posted a response to that post #5 on Friday afternoon--Aug. 3rd.

Up to this point there is no real concern, per se, yet, it cannot be logically denied that she did not answer the original question, and yet went on to ask further questions. (which again, I didn't really mind--as should be obvious enough from my #7; second paragraph)

This, then brings us back around to post #7. I argue that there is no debate up to this point. A careful investigation of my wording and the overall gist (thanks anjusan) will far more so than not show my effort to encourage 'testing' of ones knowledge. This is the type of 'questioning' that more usually carries on in university level classes--not that of simple inquiry.

My effort was to enourage nekocat san to expand beyond the 'question-only' stage because--which you will catch if you do a very careful inspection of my wording--questioning in the inquiry manner only, only can go so far before the degree of knowledge furtherance decreases.

Now, it will become clear also, when one carefully notes my several posts, that I never once challenged any matter of homework ! Nevertheless, that symptom-like expression very much seems to have come to ones mind. . . in an almost telltale way. YET...I do not care to question that, nor go into it.

It will also be clear, that I only challenge the matter of questioning to the degree that a certain type of questioning can and often does prove to lose value at an increasing rate, and that the pertinance of a question should be taken into consideration relative to the field that it is in--in this case English
as a Foreign Language.

Nekocat san, I would have been pleased if you had considered my first post very carefully, and had acted on it. (here 'act on ' refers to taking some action, such as responding to, or doing reaserch on, and so on...) I did ask you which one you thought would be correct and you never told me. Don't worry, I have no bad feelings towards you because of that, but you are incorrect in saying that you clearly answered that question in your OP.

I would like to see you posting more and more in the other areas of the forum that interest you as well...as, little by little you are doing...BUT I would like to encourage you more with that. You're English level is high enough to do that, nekocat san !! Do not worry about the small details and fineries which will not impare your general conversational ability here on JREF--just use it !! Mars Man (that is my user name; just in case)

 

[nekocat]

...all of which you could have done by sending PM.