3

He’s got France and Turkey and maybe a few others, and a statement from about ten other countries wanting some sort of international move—just not necessarily a military strike.

Does "just not necessarily" mean "ten other countries want some sort of international move, but it's not necessarily a military strike, mind you"?

Is this meaning of "just" equivalently expressed by "mind you"?

1

It seems to be saying that they want to see some action, but that they do not want to see a military strike, as that would be going overboard and doing more harm than good.

I think that saying "but it's not necessarily a military strike, mind you" sort of misses the mark a little bit, and conveys the idea that the operation they have in mind is even more threatening than an ordinary military strike, like a nuclear missile or something.

As a replacement for "just", I think "mind you," and "but" both provide good approximations, but I don't think that "mind you" without a comma is any good, as in @dcaswell's answer

I also do not agree at ALL that the original version sounds awkward, speaking as a native Australian speaker.

1

Yes, "mind you not" conveys a similar thought.

I think you can also replace "just not" with "but not".

It's an awkward-sounding sentence as quoted.

  • mind you doesn't? Am I right in my answer? Or not? sorry. – user2492 Sep 8 '13 at 21:58
  • The very first word in my answer is Yes. You are right. Sorry for not being clear enough. Mind you is okay. – dcaswell Sep 8 '13 at 22:02
0

You're right in your understanding of it. I would say about the best replacement word for just would be though. "some sort of international move—though not necessarily a military strike."

As @dcaswell noted, the quoted version sounds awkward. I hear people use that construction occasionally, and I cringe every time. It sounds sloppy and, to my ear, even a bit childish.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy