34 Owen—Meaning and Function of Thought - Connectives. 
lapsed fi;om attention at the end of the first sentence, is rein¬ 
stated in the second sentence. And, plainly, no word in the sec¬ 
ond sentence has any approximation to such reinstative power, 
except “ or. ” It, therefore, appears that “ or ” first reinstates 
preceding thought; that “or” further names the alternative 
relation between preceding and succeeding thought; that the 
reinstatement and the relation combine, as usual, to form an 
adverbial adjunct in the last sentence. Also the relation is 
thought backward — is reverse. 1 
“ Rather ” adds to the value expressed by “ or ” that of prefer¬ 
ence on the speaker’s part for the latter alternative. Thus 
1 The above case of dual indecision naturally suggests the allied case of 
plural or multiple indecision, which may be illustrated in the sentence, 
“ A is a kinsman of B.” This statement plainly contemplates a multitude 
of possible relations between the two. This multitude is capable of var¬ 
ious degrees of reduction, for which language does not usually take the 
trouble to develop special forms of expression, until the number of possi¬ 
bilities becomes very small. For instance, it is hardly worth while to state 
that A is related to B in some one of six specified varieties of kinship. 
Indeed, the colloquial phrase “one of the six ” was, no doubt, invented 
to ridicule such useless exactness. Even indecision between three possi¬ 
bilities is usually undistinguished from more general indecision. Lan¬ 
guages commonly have special expressions for indecision between two 
possibilities, but none for indecision between three or more. It is accord¬ 
ing not surprising to learn that “or,” by derivation, means “ the remaining 
one of two .” This meaning offers indeed a hint of the original thought- 
structure, which was no doubt entirely different from that above suggested, 
being appparently as follows: “ One (of two possibilities is:) A to be the 
father of B.” “ The other (of two possibilities is:) A to be the uncle of B.” 
That such was the original thought-structure is further suggested by the fre¬ 
quent introductory use, in its expression, of “ either ” (=one of two); thus, 
“ Either A is the father of B or A is the uncle of B.” But in this expres¬ 
sion each possibility is asserted, under the restriction, however, of an ad¬ 
junct. If then linguistic form is to express actual thought, the idea of 
possibleness must be found in this adjunct. Accordingly, “ either” must 
suggest the idea of possibility. This possibility is of special kind, and, as 
noted above, may be called alternativeness. Also, the first thought is re¬ 
garded as the first alternative and the second thought as the remaining 
alternative. Putting all this into an adverbial phrase, the first part expands 
into “As the first of two alternatives, A is the father of B, ” or “Firstly 
of two alternatives, A is the father of B.” Correspondingly, the second 
part becomes “ As the remaining alternative, A is the uncle of B,” or 
“ Secondly of two alternatives, A is the uncle of B.” 
