one small voice: language | |||||||
|
about who feeds categories identity archive current |
By the WayThat and which in English grammar... Recently someone IM'd me about the grammatical distinction between "that" and "which". While there are lots of nuances involved (language is fun but messy), to me the main difference is that you use "which" in phrases where you'd naturally say "by the way", whereas you use "that" in phrases that are directly descriptive of something. Consider a few sentences:
A "that" phrase can also naturally set up a comparison to another such phrase, such as:
In spoken English we often remove the "that" as unnecessary:
Sometimes people use "which" in such sentences, but only because they know that "which" is proper sometimes (but they don't know when to use it, so they use it all the time just to be sure):
Posted on 2007-05-28 at 20:59. File under language. ~ link ~ IshYet another suffix... In yesterday's post about bricks I said that my wife and I had moved a largish pile of them (today I counted and came up with 896 bricks, which I'd warrant is a largish pile!). What's up with this "-ish" suffix? As far as I can see, there are several meanings of "-ish" in English adjectives:
English is fun. Posted on 2007-05-28 at 17:17. File under language. ~ link ~ Measure ThisA confusing genitive... In my last post I used the phrase "a few months' hiatus". Here are some more examples of this construction:
What's going on here? What's with the apostrophes? Welcome to the genitive case. The grammarian Charles Fries would say that these phrases are examples of the genitive of measure, but it seems to me that we use this genitive mostly with regard to duration. For instance, we don't say that baseball is "an inches' game", but we do say that home runs were "all in a day's work" for Babe Ruth. You can think of it as "the work of a day" (or "the war of a hundred years" or "a wait of a few minutes" or "a vacation of one week" or "a hiatus of a few months"). Just remove that "of", modify the word order, and add the apostrophe. English is fun, eh? Posted on 2007-05-15 at 21:57. File under language. ~ link ~ TriskaidekalogophiliaWordie fun on Friday the 13th... I just added two more words to my Wordie list: omphaloskepsis and ultracrepidarian. Are they cool or what? Omphaloskepsis comes from the ancient Greek words for navel and sight, thus resulting in a fancy word for navel-gazing. The roots of ultracrepidarian are a bit more complex (well-explained here), but the meaning has more bite: "going beyond one's area of knowledge". Thus we could say that Al Gore was a classic ultracrepidarian when he made "An Inconvenient Truth" -- just because he invented the Internet doesn't mean he's an expert on climatology. ;-) Posted on 2007-04-13 at 21:13. File under language. ~ link ~ DumbDescribing stupidity. Have you ever thought about what it's like to be dumb? I know that I am not the smartest person on the planet, but sometimes you meet someone and you look into their dull vacant eyes and (as Gertrude Stein said about Oakland) you realize that there's no there there. Probably there are incredibly smart people who have the same feeling about me (yes, you know who you are -- I've seen that look). The experience must be quite common, because we have so many phrases for stupidity in the English language. Indeed, a guy named Dan Hersham has collected them and his list runs to 127 entries! Here are some of my favorites:
But he's missing one of my favorites, which we used back in Maine when I was growing up: "Only got half a cord in the woodshed." :-) And another: "The elevator goes to the top but the doors don't open." Posted on 2007-01-17 at 19:41. File under language. ~ link ~ FrithThe bonds of friendship and freedom. By wandering through the blogosphere, I've just been introduced to the Old English word frith. Quite a fascinating word, and one that shares the same root with "friend" and "free". I'll post more on the idea upon further reflection. Posted on 2007-01-04 at 22:13. File under language. ~ link ~ AccentuationAm I from Philadelphia? According to this quiz, my regional American accent is "as Philadelphian as a cheesesteak! If you're not from Philadelphia, then you're from someplace near there like south Jersey, Baltimore, or Wilmington." Well. I admit that I lived in New Hope, Pennsylvania for a few years before moving to Denver. But I grew up on the North Shore of Long Island and moved to Maine when I was ten, then went to college in New York City, taught English in Czechoslovakia, worked in Atlanta for two years, and relocated to northern New Jersey for three years before Pennsylvania and then Denver. Maybe if you average that out you end up with Philadelphia, but I doubt it. :-) (Then again, according to this, I'm 97% Mainer. I guess I just don't talk like one...) Posted on 2007-01-02 at 22:37. File under language. ~ link ~ Wordie 3000Language addiction redux. OK, I've hit 3000 words at Wordie. My 3000th word is thrive. I think I'll leave it at 3000 for a while because it's fun to see that big round number on the homepage. :-) Posted on 2007-01-02 at 21:19. File under language. ~ link ~ SnipperdagenSome days off. I'm playing hooky this week. The Dutch word for a day off playing hooky is snipperdag -- one of my favorite Dutch words, along with stippeltje ("polkadot") and the nearly-impossible-to-pronounce verschikkelijk ("terrible"). Posted on 2006-12-26 at 19:17. File under language. ~ link ~ EnsconcedA lexicographical excursus. A call came in over the language line last weekend regarding "ensconced" ("hidden away") -- in particular, is it related at all to "sconce" (in the sense of "a lantern-like wall lamp")? Well, I'm glad you asked! It turns out there may be a relationship here, but it's a tangled tale of linguistic evolution punctuated by prefixes and suffixes, lengthening and shortening, addition and subtraction, derivation and projection. It all starts with those crazy Romans and the Latin word "do", meaning "to give" or "to put" (the English equivalents have hundreds of meanings, and so does the Latin original). Add the prefix "com/con" ("together") and you have "condo", meaning "to put together" or "to stow" (is that what people do with their condos?). Add another prefix "ab/abs" ("away") and you have "abscondo", meaning "to stow away" or "to hide away" (thus English "abscond"). So much for building up, now we start taking away. The Latin "absconsa laterna" was a "hidden lantern" or "dark lantern" (i.e., a portable lantern with a screen for protecting the flame). The medievals lopped off the "laterna", calling it "absconsa" and, eventually, "sconsa" (in Old French "esconse"). Thus the modern English "sconce" (I suppose eventually folks stopped carrying those lanterns around and attached them to a convenient wall -- or at least the design was similar). That's one kind of sconce. A second meaning of "sconce" is a small earthwork or fort, or a shelter or screen that protects one from weather or fire. Does that kind of sconce enable one to "hide away" (thus deriving from the Latin "abscondo")? Well, maybe. But probably this meaning comes from the Dutch "schans", meaning "brushwood", "bundle of sticks", "earthwork made with gabions" (familiar to those of us who have visited the famous Zaanse Schans) -- with the spelling modified to conform to Romanized English expectations. What of "ensconce" (sometimes formerly "insconce")? It originally meant "to be in a sconce", where "sconce" was used in the second sense of a protective fortification. Thus to be ensconced was to be safe from harm or attack; eventually the meaning was extended to less martial situations, so that today "ensconce" is used mainly to denote the act of settling into a place that is warm, cozy, and comfortable (what the Dutch call "gezellig"). Language is fun, eh? :-) Posted on 2006-12-26 at 18:57. File under language. ~ link ~ Double ConsonantsOrthographical confusion. English spelling is a morass of rules, semi-rules, and exceptions. One semi-rule is that a vowel before a single consonant is long, whereas before a double consonant it is short -- contrast snipe with snipped, rile with rill, abate with batten, and so on. But when a word has three or more syllables that rule seems to go out the window. So for instance the last two syllables of "shipper" and "worshiper" are pronounced exactly the same. Why don't we spell the latter "worshipper"? Personally I do, but "worshiper" is acceptable and seemingly preferred -- see also marvelous vs. marvellous, traveled vs. travelled, etc. Yet "prefered" is wrong and "preferred" is right. Those who learn English as a second language must find such phenomena endlessly frustrating... Posted on 2006-12-23 at 21:21. File under language. ~ link ~ Wordie(st)Language addiction. I wasn't kidding when I said I was smitten with Wordie (ooo, smitten is a good word, I think I'll add that one!). With a little scripting help from Joe Hildebrand I was able to upload my existing personal word list. The result is that my list now contains over 2300 words. So it seems that I'm now the wordiest of the wordies (well, at least until someone like colleen adds some more words). What fun! Posted on 2006-12-07 at 21:51. File under language. ~ link ~ Getting WordieFor the love of words. Dizzy recently pointed me to Wordie, a social networking site for those who love words (they advertise themselves as "like Flickr, but without the photos"). Those who know me won't find it hard to believe that I've taken to this service like a duck to water. Indeed, some years ago I came up with a long list of my favorite words -- words that I like for their sound, their style, their rhythm, their look, their meaning, or any feature I happen to find attractive. So I've begun transferring my favorite words over to Wordie; I've gotten up through words beginning in the letter E (with a few outliers that have struck my fancy more recently), resulting in 450+ words to date. I'll be inputting more as time allows... Posted on 2006-12-03 at 22:33. File under language. ~ link ~ Off OfFrom the department of excessive redundancy. In this post, the great Instapundit saith:
I can't say that I disagree with him about Islam, but I sure don't like his grammar. "Off of" is straight from the department of excessive redundancy if you ask me, since "off" was originally the emphatic form of "of" (see the OED for details). Sheesh! Thanks for letting me get that off [of] my chest... ;-) Posted on 2006-11-26 at 19:51. File under language. ~ link ~ Got Nouns?Further insights into Anglospheric thinking. Sometimes you can glean a lot of folk philosophy from language. Here are the 25 most common nouns in English, which I think reveal quite a bit about the Anglosphere sense of life:
I'd like to see this list compared to lists from other languages... Posted on 2006-06-22 at 09:53. File under language. ~ link ~ Nothing WordsCutting out the filler. Back when I worked as an editor, I used to be especially hardnosed about what I like to call "nothing words", such as "very", "really", "just", and "actually". These words add nothing to a sentence and are mere filler. Consider the difference:
I find it hard to remove these nothing words from my speech because that's how people talk nowadays, but I've been working to ruthlessly remove them from my writing. Posted on 2006-01-16 at 08:39. File under language. ~ link ~ The Gift of a Common LanguageChurchill on English. Herewith a quote from Winston Chuchill (speech at Harvard, 1943):
Posted on 2005-12-08 at 21:43. File under language. ~ link ~ This and NextA consistent temporal confusion. The temporal distinction between "this" and "next" can be confusing to those who are learning English, as I found out today by trying to describe it to someone. Consider the following exchange between two co-workers on the morning of Thursday, December 8:
Got it? This week means "the week we're in right now". Next week means "the next week that will happen after this week we're in right now". The week after next means "the week that will happen after next week". I think we talk this way because we divide time into weekends and weeks. So this week is the Monday through Friday of the week we're in right now, but "this weekend" is the weekend that directly follows this week -- in our example, Saturday and Sunday, December 10 and 11. By contrast, "next weekend" is the weekend that directly follows next week -- in our example, Saturday and Sunday, December 17 and 18. (Just like "this year" is the year we're in right now whereas "next year" is the year that follows this year -- thus the silly habit of saying "see you next year" on December 31.) It may be confusing, but at least it's consistent. Posted on 2005-12-08 at 18:29. File under language. ~ link ~ Of CourseEradicating lazy phrases. In the passage from Alexander Baumgarten that I quoted earlier today, the author asserted "it is entirely evident that...." In my youth I accepted such statements, but over time I've found them more and more irksome, since I think they are merely a substitute for reasoned argument. The lazy thinker (and writer) says that "of course", "certainly", "obviously", "evidently", "indubitably" his position is correct and that of his opponent is wrongheaded; the clear thinker and writer never uses such lazy phrases. (I must admit that I sometimes use the word "naturally"; but I think that some things are indeed natural, whereas nothing is obvious.) Posted on 2005-06-19 at 19:57. File under language. ~ link ~ EnglishLanguage and liberty. Thanks to a recommendation from Claire Wolfe, I've just read a delightful and insightful history of the English language: Our Marvelous Native Tongue by Robert Claiborne. I found several aspects of Claiborne's treatment especially interesting. First, he is not shy about celebrating the English language as the greatest vehicle for communication in the history of humankind. That's not jingoism: Claiborne points out that English has three times as many words as its nearest "competitor" (French) and continues to borrow and create words at a faster pace than other tongues, thus making possible a range and subtlety of expression that no other language can match. Second, he connects the incredible flexibility of English with the flexibilty of Anglospheric customs and institutions: for Claiborne, language and liberty go hand-in-hand. More than any other major culture, the Anglosphere has been open to emergent orders rather than imposed orders; not for the British or Americans the centralized linguistic planning of the Académie Française. No, folks in the Anglosphere are pretty darn libertarian about language, which is not unconnected with the fact that they tend to be more libertarian about society as well. Not surprisingly, Claiborne comes down closer to the linguistic descriptivists than he does to the linguistic prescriptivists. After all, our language has always been changing -- from Indo-European to proto-Germanic to the Old English of the Angles and Jutes and Saxons to the Middle English of Chaucer to the Modern English we know today. Common sense, good taste, and clear expression are always in style, but prescriptivism is mere muddleheadedness. An English settled and prescribed for all time would not be our free, living, ever-changing English. A free folk need a living language. May we English-speakers always have our language and our liberty. Posted on 2005-06-19 at 15:57. File under language. ~ link ~ The Deep PurpleRoyal origins? Someone emailed me last night with a question about the phrase "the deep purple" -- not the rock band or the song by Peter De Rose with lyrics by Mitchell Parish, but the phrase as used, for example, in this line from a play written in the early 1900s:
I would speculate that the phrase "the deep purple" is a reference to the ancient tradition of purple as a royal color. In ancient times, it was quite expensive to produce purple clothing -- the dye was mainly derived from the shells of the murex (a kind of mollusk), for example as found off the coast of Tyre in southern Lebanon (thus Tyrian purple). Thus purple clothing tended to be reserved to the royalty or nobility. This usage survives in phrases like "purple prose" to describe an ornate writing style and "purple passage" to describe writings that have gained kudos because of their noble qualities (an example might be Hamlet's soliloquy). So to be "bred in the deep purple" might mean something like being born with a silver spoon in one's mouth or, more positively, to have noble blood running in one's veins. This seems consistent with the quote provided by my interlocutor. But, again, that is speculation on my part. Posted on 2005-05-24 at 10:43. File under language. ~ link ~ ContractionsMore on ain't and other English verbs. The other day I argued for ain't as a fine Anglo-Saxon word. Herewith some further considerations. You'll notice that we have many contractions for various forms of "to be" in English:
Sure, one could insist that others use "I'm not" rather than "I ain't", but then why not insist on "we're not" rather than "we aren't", "it's not" rather than "it isn't", and so on down the line? I see no good reason to disqualify "ain't" on grammatical grounds. (I know, accepting "ain't" may seem like lowdown linguistic latitudinarianism to you grammatical prescriptivists out there -- you know who you are! -- but personally I see it more as a return to our Anglo-Saxon roots. What's next, you ask? Will I come out in favor of "y'all"? Only time will tell...) Posted on 2005-05-19 at 21:43. File under language. ~ link ~ Ain'tA four-letter word? You'll notice that I use the word "ain't" once in a while. Personally I think it's a fine word -- or at least a fun word -- so I decided it was time to do a bit of research. It turns out that ain't is an alternate (and more common) spelling of "an't", which is a contraction for "am not" (some dialects of English contain "amn't" but that's hard to say, which is why the "m" was dropped). Now, an't or ain't came into broad use about the same time as most of our other verbal contractions -- aren't, isn't, can't, don't, and the like. So why did ain't come to have such a nasty reputation, whereas even grammatical prescriptivists are perfectly happy with isn't and aren't? Well, Dr. Language himself has investigated the matter and his conclusion is that ain't fills a gaping void in the English language, namely as a contraction for "am not" -- but that its use is warranted only with the first-person singular. Thus "ain't English grand?" does not cut the mustard, whereas "I ain't interested in your grammatical prescriptivism!" is just fine. Try it on for size! Posted on 2005-05-17 at 21:04. File under language. ~ link ~ Singular TheirGood English. Latinizing grammarians and other small-minded pedants claim that no self-respecting lover of the English language can use "their" as a singular pronoun -- as in: "Anyone who loves English will watch their grammar." Well, this page shows that "singular their" has a long history of use as fine English since the 1300s, having been used by illustrious authors such as Chaucer, Shakespeare, Daniel Defoe, Jane Austen, Lord Byron, Charles Dickens, Rudyard Kipling, George Bernard Shaw, and George Orwell. And the singular their is so much more graceful than that awful "his or her" business -- ick! Posted on 2005-05-17 at 20:43. File under language. ~ link ~ KudosSingularly wrong. This morning over breakfast, I glanced at the cover of the Central Denver Dispatch & Cherry Creek News and was horrified to see the following headline:
Forgive me for shouting, but there is no such thing as a kudo! The English word "kudos" comes directly from the Greek κυδος, a singular noun meaning "glory" (pronounced "koo-doss", not "koo-doze"). To "gain kudos" means to win praise or glory. You don't win a single praise or a single glory for a single good deed, and then win multiple "praises" or multiple "glories" for multiple good deeds. You either win praise or you don't. I suppose I shouldn't expect much from a local monthly paper, but I get rather particular about words borrowed from Greek... Posted on 2005-04-28 at 07:19. File under language. ~ link ~ Play Ball!Some American idioms. The other day I was talking with someone about the funny idioms of American English, which can make it so hard for non-native speakers to understand what we're saying. Sometimes it's difficult to know which idioms are truly American and which were inherited from our English ancestors, but it's probably safe to say that our many baseball idioms originated in the New World. So as a public service I've decided to write about American idioms and phrases, starting with some baseball-related idioms. There are so many baseball idioms (I count at least 40 of them) that it's hard to know where to start. However, in general, when you don't know where to start, it's best to start at the beginning. :-) So the first phrase we'll investigate is this:
Somewhere in America that phrase is probably being uttered in an official capacity right now, because they are the words that a baseball umpire shouts in order to start a game. When used on the baseball field, the words mean "The game begins now!" or "Start playing!" (you'll notice that the phrase is a command, not a request). But they are also used in normal speech in an extended sense, meaning something like "Let's get going" (or, in slang, "Let's get this show on the road" -- is that a baseball phrase, too?). However, "playing ball" is not always a competitive activity -- for example, two people can simply toss a ball back and forth. As a result, "to play ball" can mean "to cooperate, to work together". Thus one might hear a business person say something like "we tried to negotiate with that supplier, but they just wouldn't play ball". A similar phrase is "now we're playing ball" -- meaning "now things are moving, now we're making progress" (another idiom that means the same thing is "now we're cooking with gas", which comes from the days when gas stoves were a new technology, supplanting old wood-fired stoves). See, ain't American English fun? (BTW, with this entry I've inaugurated a new category for my musings on language.) Posted on 2005-04-19 at 21:03. File under language. ~ link ~ HomonymPrinciple vs. principal. Yesterday I read a technical document that was quite interesting but in which the author repeatedly used "principal" when he meant "principle"; so to help the author remember the difference, I came up with the following:
Now, some of my best friends are lawyers, so I don't mean that quite seriously, but you have to admit that it is easy to remember! Posted on 2005-03-18 at 14:21. File under language. ~ link ~ Blogito ReduxA lesson in modern Latin. Daniel Drezner and Henry Farrell's article Web of Influence is quite a comprehensive exploration of the blogosphere and its influence on real life. Unfortunately, the heading for the penultimate section is "blogo ergo sum" rather than "blogito ergo sum". Aside from the latter's Cartesian overtones and the fact that I coined the phrase, a simple GoogleFight shows that "blogito ergo sum" is the preferred form. Perhaps we'll need to have the keepers of Modern Latin adjudicate this dispute... :-) (Update: Mr. Drezner reminds me that article titles and section headings are often written by the publication's editorial staff, so the target of my nit is properly not the authors in this instance. Mea culpa.) Posted on 2004-12-15 at 13:59. File under language. ~ link ~ Blogito Ergo SumThe spreading of a meme. It seems that (with a nod to René Descartes) I coined the phrase "blogito ergo sum" back on October 8th, 2001 (and Google agrees). Now folks are offering customized T-shirts with that phrase -- perhaps they'll be the hot Christmas gift for bloggers worldwide. And it's as true today as it ever was: I blog therefore I am. :-) Posted on 2004-12-01 at 19:11. File under language. ~ link ~ OnlyA grammar nit. I'm a stickler when it comes to grammar. Of late, I've found it particularly irksome when writers commit the all-too-common misplacement of the word 'only'. Here's an example:
As an adverb or conjunction, 'only' is synonymous both with 'merely' and with 'exclusively'; but, as the OED notes, the term is best placed directly preceding or following the word or phrase it limits -- placing it away from that word or phrase "is now avoided by perspicuous writers". The inherent ambiguity of the sentence quoted above comes into relief when we move the clauses around:
It's easy to move 'only' so that it limits (in this example) the conditional "if" rather than the verb "keep". So be perspicuous and put 'only' in its place! Posted on 2003-12-22 at 21:52. File under language. ~ link ~ Klue-AidA silly word. In conversation with Lisa Dusseault last night, I came up with the silly word "Klue-Aid" -- the beverage that someone must drink in order to get a clue. Much more friendly than a cluebat, that's for sure, and perhaps even a gateway to drinking the Kool-Aid of true enlightenment. ;-) Posted on 2003-11-11 at 21:01. File under language. ~ link ~ The WordWebsite addiction alert! On the way back from a post-lunch stroll, a co-worker and I jaywalked across an intersection, which got me thinking about the origins of the term "jaywalking". A quick Google search yields the following:
The source is word-detective.com, which appears to be a highly addictive website, at least for a word maven like me. Surf at your peril! Posted on 2003-05-30 at 13:41. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #14On the move. This week's words all relate to movement (yes, I was traveling this week):
Posted on 2002-11-22 at 11:46. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #13A visit with the Muses. Following up on last week's theme of Greek mythology, each of this week's words relates to one of the nine Muses:
It seems we don't have adjectives in English derived from Calliope (epic poetry), Clio (history), Erato (lyric or love poetry), or Polyhymnia (sacred poetry). Definitely something to muse on... Posted on 2002-11-15 at 13:23. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #12A titanic week. Each of this week's words is derived from the name of an ancient Greek god or hero. The characters are all mythical so take these words cum granum salis:
Posted on 2002-11-08 at 00:11. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #11In the dark. In honor of All Hallow's Even (or the festival of Samhain if you prefer the holiday's pagan roots), this week all of our words describe various state of darkness:
That's not even to mention words like caliginous (dark and gloomy), fuscous (dusky), fuliginous (sooty), and atramentous (inky black). There sure are a lot of words for darkness in the English language! Posted on 2002-11-02 at 09:27. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #10Color my world. This week's words all describe colors:
Have a vinaceous weekend! Next week: words for various shades of black and states of darkness. Posted on 2002-10-24 at 22:18. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #9Some interesting characters. Ever wonder what the official names are for some of the familiar characters on your keyboard or the less common marks you see on the printed page? This week's words fill you in....
Posted on 2002-10-18 at 17:19. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #8Sounding things out. The "words of the week" this time all have to do with sound:
Posted on 2002-10-11 at 08:56. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #7Weird words from the dismal science. Last week's words were as follows:
Posted on 2002-10-03 at 22:59. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #5 and #6Further fun with language. I haven't posted any "words of the week" in a while, though I wrote some on my whiteboard a fortnight or so ago, and this week as well. I can't quite recall Words4Nerds #5 (I know prevaricate, dissemble, and dubiety were on the list), but this week's words, on the theme of power and authority, are as follows:
That last word provides a fine segue to the first entry in Words4Nerds #7 (strange and obscure terms from the dismal science of economics), but we'll have to wait a week or two for those! Posted on 2002-09-13 at 07:36. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds #4Another version of Words of the Week. Once you start a tradition, it's hard to stop -- people have expectations! So this week I was shoehorned into creating another installment of "words of the week" on my whiteboard at work. This week's theme is words of strong emotion (well, except for Friday's word -- needed something calm and peaceful after all that Sturm und Drang):
Posted on 2002-08-02 at 14:01. File under language. ~ link ~ BeastlyAnother lexicographical excursus. Yum, I just found this page containing a big list of collective nouns for animals. Reminded me of a poem I wrote along those lines once. But really I was looking for Latin-derived adjectives for various animals. You know canine and feline and bovine and equine, but do you know lupine and taurine and ursine and porcine? I do, but until now I didn't know anguine and ranine and lapine and murine. Words are fun. :) Posted on 2002-07-24 at 13:57. File under language. ~ link ~ Words4Nerds, Volume 3Another version of "Words of the Week". After a week of hiking in the mountains of Wyoming, I decided to devote this week's lexicographical excursus to geographical terms of (mostly) Anglo-Saxon origin. Here they are:
Posted on 2002-07-19 at 19:36. File under language. ~ link ~ Werds4NerdsWords of the Week, Volume II. I wrote some more "words of the week" on my whiteboard at work this week (wow, I wonder how many "w" words I can fit in a sentence!). This week's words were animadversion, otiose, prolix, preternatural, and pusillanimous. I was tempted to add susurrus but I think I'll save that for next time. :) Posted on 2002-06-27 at 17:56. File under language. ~ link ~ Words of the WeekMore etymological entertainment. My whiteboard at the office has a new use: the repository of some obscure words of the day. Today's word, for no good reason, is eleemosynary: of, giving, or receiving alms; having to do with charity. I think tomorrow's word will be pleroma: fullness, plenitude (esp., in Gnostic theology, the spiritual world as the abode of God and of the totality of divine powers and emanations). Not sure how long I'll keep this up, but it's fun while it lasts.... Posted on 2002-06-03 at 20:25. File under language. ~ link ~ Playing HookyNet-free weekend on the way. Yes, I'm playing hooky from work tomorrow -- a four-day weekend! We have friends coming into town, so I'll be spending time with them (they're thinking about moving to Denver, so we're going to give them the grand tour). Thus I won't be touching web, email, or Jabber until next Tuesday. BTW, I got to talking with a non-native speaker of English today about the phrase "playing hooky" (yes, there's a web page about the phenomenon). My copy of Webster's New World Dictionary College Edition (my second-favorite dictionary after the trusty OED) reports that "hooky" derives from the slang phrase "hook it", which means "to run away". American idioms are fun. Posted on 2002-05-23 at 21:44. File under language. ~ link ~ TriskaidekaphiliaOn the number 13. Yes, today is the 13th of May. Why are humans afraid of the number 13? Weird. It's always been one of my favorites. But then again I love prime numbers. Posted on 2002-05-13 at 10:34. File under language. ~ link ~ WordologyA lexicographical excursus. It's amusing how a simple typo can send you scurrying for the OED. In a post about the intellectual history of the Enlightenment, Diana Hsieh writes of the "philosophical cannon". Now there's a concept! The OED notes that "the spellings canon and cannon occur side by side down nearly to 1800, though the latter is the more frequent after circa 1660". Both 'canon' and 'cannon' derive ultimately from the Greek καννα meaning "a reed". Yet the terms diverged early on, with κανων meaning "a straight [and presumably solid] rod" as well as "a rule" used by carpenters, whereas 'cannon' derives from the hollow side of the reed/rod family (Italian cannone is a large tube or barrel). Nietzsche once claimed to be philosophizing with a hammer, but to philosophize with a cannon is really to bring out the big guns! That line from Nietzsche is often interpreted in a nihilistic sense, with "hammer" understood to be a sledgehammer (something one step short of a philosophical cannon, as it were). Yet the full quote from the preface to Twilight of the Idols reveals a lighter touch:
Nietzsche's talk about idols hearkens back to Francis Bacon and his discussion of the Four Idols in The New Organon (an οργανον is a man-made tool, which is why our current sense of "organic" is diametrically opposite from the term's root meaning!). Interestingly, the English meaning of idol as the image of a false god (extended by Bacon to mean a dogma) was the final sense of the Greek ειδολων to develop historically -- the term originally meant an appearance or phantom, later on an image (as in a mirror), then a mental image or idea (as in Plato's "Theory of Ideas"), then a mimetic likeness as in a statue or "graven image". In English we retain the same root notion of vacuity in the word "idle". And a dogma is just idle words: it is what one believes or holds to be true ('tenet' comes from the Latin tenere meaning "to hold") -- usually a philosophical belief, and not always one that is justified (for Bacon a philosophical dogma was prima facie suspect, since it was not derived from nature but from the self-spun web of human ideas and language). Because karma is a Sanskrit term that means "action", when we say "my karma ran over my dogma" we essentially mean that actions speak louder than words. Tenets, anyone? Posted on 2002-04-07 at 21:45. File under language. ~ link ~ |
identity... my back pages me my group blogs albion's seedlings jabberites adam nemeth techies barry leiba wonks cafe hayek i use... i support... i listen to... fighting censorship... current threat level... flying the flag...
|
|||||
| |||||||
| |||||||