"Either must die at the hand of the other " (was "messy post")

[Matt]

No: HPFGUIDX 85800

--- Carol wrote, in response to Iris: 
> The Prophecy does *not* say that neither Harry nor 
> Voldemort can defeat the other without dying ....
> What the Prophecy actually says is "either must 
> die at the hand of the other for neither can live 
> while the other survives" (OoP Am. ed. 841).
> 
> In other words, one will have to die at the hand 
> of the other, not both will kill the other.  

Just writing to point out something that I'm sure
has been said on list at some point, although I
don't recall seeing it.  

While the prophecy does not unambiguously say that 
Harry must die in killing Voldemort, it is at least
open to that reading.  The use of "either" in the 
prophecy is ambiguous.  While the word is more 
commonly (and colloquially) used in a disjunctive 
sense -- referring to one or the other of a pair -- 
it is also used (in poetry, for instance) in a 
conjunctive sense, referring to both members of the 
pair.  A common example of the second usage is the 
phrase "on either side," which typically means "on 
both sides."  

It appears that Harry and Dumbledore are interpreting the prophecy in
the disjunctive sense, as Carol does, to mean that either Harry or
Voldemort will die in their final confrontation.  This explains
Dumbledore's concern (assuming you credit it) with protecting Harry
while he is most vulnerable, so that he will be as well-prepared as
possible at the moment of truth.  

An alternate reading is that rather than describing two possibilities,
the prophecy describes one certainty: *each* will die at the hand of
the other.  That reading also suggests the possibility of a more
metaphorical reading of "die" -- Marj Garber fans, get your minds out
of the gutter -- in which there could perhaps be some compromise of
the absolutes that Harry and Voldemort represent.

-- Matt