14

From episode 5 of the television series The Walking Dead:

I say we put a pickaxe in his head and the dead girl's and be done with it.
Is that what you'd want if it were you?
Yeah, and I'd thank you while you did it.
I hate to say it. I never thought I would but maybe Daryl's right.
Jim's not a monster, Dale, or some rabid dog.
I'm not suggesting...
He's sick. A sick man. We start down that road, where do we draw the line?
The line's pretty clear. Zero tolerance for walkers, or them to be.
What if we can get him help? I heard the CDC was working on a cure.

How do you understand that part grammatically?

CowperKettle
  • 36,571
  • 17
  • 132
  • 226
Michael Rybkin
  • 37,600
  • 29
  • 167
  • 310
  • 1
    For one that hasn't seen the episode, I must admit, the dialogue seems exasperatingly baffling. – M.A.R. Feb 11 '15 at 11:28
  • 1
    The dialogue is clear to me (AmEng). I think it would be understood by most native English speakers. – CoolHandLouis Feb 11 '15 at 15:20
  • 1
    Them-to-be should really be hyphenated. Without the hyphens, it appears to be a sentence that got cut off (though a fluent speaker can still parse it as intended). In speech, the stresses go like this: “Them to be…” vs. “Them-to-be.” – Ben Kovitz Feb 12 '15 at 02:19

2 Answers2

24

He's sick. A sick man. We start down that road, where do we draw the line?
The line's pretty clear. Zero tolerance for walkers, or them to be.

The meaning is

Zero tolerance for walkers, or for those who are to become walkers.

or

Zero tolerance for walkers, or for future walkers.

Compare with

Bride-to-be: a woman who is soon to be married.

We can put walkers in the place of the pronoun "them", and we'll get

Zero tolerance for walkers, or walkers-to-be.

P.S.

From the grammar standpoint, this seems to be a "postpositive noun modifier".

ColleenV
  • 11,971
  • 13
  • 47
  • 85
CowperKettle
  • 36,571
  • 17
  • 132
  • 226
  • 2
    Is that Southern broken-English grammar? Something along the lines of "I like them apples". 'cause the guy who says it is your typical hilly-billy from the state of Georgia. – Michael Rybkin Feb 11 '15 at 11:43
  • 1
    @CookieMonster - I'm not a Henry Higgins to distinguish between different regions' grammars, but my guess is that words like "father-to-be, bride-to-be, Johnie-come-lately" are known even to hillbillies and hillbillies lack no skill in using such patterns to produce new combinations. – CowperKettle Feb 11 '15 at 11:49
  • 7
    @CookieMonster Them here is the pronoun, in the objective case as the object of for: "Zero tolerance for them [to be = who will be]". (There are, by the way, no hillbillies in Georgia: the white agricultural underclass there are 'crackers'.) – StoneyB on hiatus Feb 11 '15 at 12:27
  • 1
    Oh, so it's an infinitive clause with the subject introduced by "for" (wich is omitted). Nice. – CowperKettle Feb 11 '15 at 12:29
  • 2
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_cracker – TimR Feb 11 '15 at 12:55
  • 4
    @CookieMonster It is certainly not normal, every-day English and, while we understand what it means, most would not use that particular turn of phrase. – Catija Feb 11 '15 at 15:13
  • 1
    @CopperKettle: "of for" -> "or for" –  Feb 11 '15 at 20:20
  • 1
    @Catija I think it depends on where you live whether it is normal, everyday English. It is a fairly common style of speaking around these parts, particularly when speaking to persuade or make a point with emphasis; The idea being to keep it short and memorable. – ColleenV Feb 11 '15 at 23:49
  • Look at ColleenV's edit to your post. –  Feb 12 '15 at 08:12
  • @RickyDemer - I see! Thanks! It's sometimes hard for me to distinguish small letter details. – CowperKettle Feb 12 '15 at 08:12
  • 1
    @RickyDemer If you see a typo like that, you should be able to suggest an edit - they usually get approved fairly quickly. Once you have more reputation, you'll be able to edit directly (as I did). There's more detail about how editing works in the help center: http://ell.stackexchange.com/help/editing – ColleenV Feb 12 '15 at 19:39
1

In practice spoken English is different than written English. Listening to the dialog makes sense and flows well, reading it makes it seem awkward and incorrect. Its the evolution of language....

person
  • 119
  • 1
  • 2
    While true in some cases, I'm not sure this answers the question, which was about the grammar and not the flow. – ColleenV Feb 11 '15 at 23:41
  • Good point. Id say the OP is correct about the grammer being incorrect in this case. – person Feb 11 '15 at 23:45