Monthly Archives: September 2008

31: Rank Hath Its Surliness

from Merriam-Webster.com, 17 September, 2008.

“In its very earliest uses in the 16th century, “surly” meant “majestic” or “lordly” These early meanings make sense when you know that this word is an alteration of Middle English “serreli”, which probably comes from “sire, ser”, a title formerly used as a form of address for men of rank or authority. So how did a word with such lofty beginnings come to be associated with grumbling rudeness? Arrogant and domineering behavior is sometimes associated with men of rank or position, and “surly” came to mean “haughty” or “imperious”. These meanings (which are now obsolete) led to the “rude” sense that is very common today.”

Oddly enough, for “rude”, at bottom, means “coarse and rustic” or “characteristic of uneducated people” — hardly “men [sic] of rank or position” — at least some of them.

END

30: “Unbelievable Quality!”

A replica-watch purveyor sent me the following spam email:

“Unbelievable Quality – We have fake Swiss Men’s and Ladie’s [sic] Replica Watches from Rolex to the Popular Panerai Watch”

OK, I don’t believe the quality; that was easy.

But the assault on our language goes deeper: What level of quality am I supposed to unbelieve? Too often, “quality” is used to mean “high quality”, ignoring the possibility of middling or low quality — in the replica-watch industry, very good possibilities, indeed. In a country where all the children are gifted and talented, all the watches must be “quality”.

Regarding fake watches, it is legal to bring one (and only one, at least at a time) into the USA — see Customs regulations. The cases of replicas are often well made; one reason they’re cheap is that they often use Chinese-made movements. The Chinese make some excellent watch movements (“quality”), but also some that possess the attribute of quality in a very different way. Which would they send you?

END

25: A Suspense Plot for Fictional Treatment

The following plot is based on events in Pennsylvania surrounding the murder of a woman named Dana Gates, as reported in local newspapers in 2001 and 2002. There was, of course, considerable speculation about the case — and there still is.

1. A woman, ‘A’, is found naked and dead in her front yard. Her fiancé, ‘B’ is found inside the house, severely wounded. Police conclude that ‘B’ ’s injuries could not have been self-inflicted.

2. Police suspicion focuses on a man, ‘C’, who had been annoying ‘A’. Evidence of his presence is found inside ‘A’ ’s home. ‘C’ is arrested.

3. Popular suspicion, however, focuses on a notorious ‘Bonnie and Clyde’ couple, who were seen socializing with ‘A’ and ‘B’ shortly before their deaths. (Both are later convicted of a different murder, in another state, and are given long prison terms.)

4. ‘B’ cannot remember what happened the night of ‘A’ ’s death. ‘C’ admits he was inside ‘A’ ’s home, but denies his guilt in her death. He is released for lack of evidence.

Fictional hypothesis: The murderer knows that ‘B’ might regain his memory of the fatal night at any time. Afraid that if he kills ‘B’ he may be caught, and hoping that ‘B’ will never remember what happened, he takes a job near ‘B’ ’s home. He befriends ‘B’ — and observes. Meanwhile, ‘C’, concerned that if any harm comes to ‘B’ he will automatically be the prime suspect, also keeps an eye out on ‘B’, to protect him. There is an attempt on ‘B’ ’s life, which fails. ‘C’, under suspicion, realizes that ‘A’ ‘s killer is nearby, but does not know which of several people it is. He knows he must find out who the killer is, both to prove his own innocence, and knowing that he, himself, is now in the murderer’s sights.

END

28: Exasperated by Merriam-Webster

Merriam-Webster will be happy to email you a word every day, with its uses, examples of use, and etymology. This is an informative service, and recommended. However, the pronunciations M-W recommends are often slovenly, at times too-obviously reflecting practices of ignorant people. This just encourages, and serves to justify, sloppy speech. It also bedevils new Americans (and our children, too) who are trying their best to learn our language. It’s no wonder that the English spoken by people who were educated in India, Africa, or the Mid-East, for example, is often clearer and more intelligible than that of native Americans such as myself.

Example: How would you say “exasperate”? The folks at M-W seem to pronounce it \ig-ZAS-puh-rayt\. Or perhaps they don’t actually say it this way, themselves; they just think that most Americans do, and therefore we all should.

There are several problems with “\ig-ZAS-puh-rayt\”:

(a) Where did the initial ‘i’ and ‘g’ come from? What’s wrong with ‘e’ and ‘x’ (\ks\), just as spelled? I’ve lived in six U.S. states (both coasts and in between); I don’t think I’ve ever heard “\ig-ZAS-puh-rayt\”.

(b) The derivation of the word is ‘ex’, plus ‘asper’, plus a common suffix. In English, we would split this word, if needed, both in speaking and in spelling, exactly that way: ex-asper…’. M-W splits the initial consonant between two syllables, resulting in a \ZAS\ that has no historical justification.

(c) If we must have \puhrayt\, at least split it \puhr-ayt\, giving a decent respect to the embedded ‘asper’, and the existence of ‘ate’ \ayt\ (not ‘rate’) as an English suffix with the required meaning.

(d) Any recommended pronunciation, such as \ig-ZAS-puh-rayt\, either respects the evolution of the word, or privileges the speech of one class or region. In the past, the speech of wealthy white people in the Northeast was privileged over the speech of, for example, whites in Tennessee or Idaho, and over racial minorities as well. The only way to avoid such snobbery is to base pronunciation on the structure of the word itself, and its evolution over time.

“Not a sermon; just a harangue.”

(References: See the discussion of “speak as you spell” in Modern English Usage, 2d edition, p.483; see also the analogous discussion in the 1st edition, p.466f. Fowler would have liked “\ig-ZAS-puh-rayt\”.)

END

26: Folk Etymology: Not All Bad

‘Shame-faced’ is not derived from ‘shame’ and ‘faced’, but from ‘shamfast’, i.e., held fast by a feeling of shame — nothing to do with faces.

This is an example of ‘folk etymology’, a word or usage based on a derivation that is, historically, not the case.

Usage experts dislike folk etymology. They don’t actually say ‘poo-poo’ (etymology unknown), or ‘tut-tut’, but they might as well use these terms.

But consider: folk etymology may be a normal and robust way the language grows — and don’t we often see shame expressed in a face?

Heidegger made frequent and shameless (derived from ‘shame’ and ‘less’) use of folk etymology in his philosophical works. Although often derided by later philosophers, it was, in his hands, a remarkably useful and frugiferous tool.

END