Showing posts with label words. Show all posts
Showing posts with label words. Show all posts
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Saturday, June 27, 2009
100 Most Beautiful English Words
I'm not sure that these are the exact ones I'd have chosen, but according to Alphadictionary.com, here are the 100 most beautiful words in the English language. Of course, words like "erstwhile" and "quintessential" are beautiful. But "fluke"? I love the word, but I'd classify it as funny rather than beautiful.
Thanks to Ian for bringing this site to my attention.
Bungalow--Chatoyant--Comely--Conflate--Cynosure--Dalliance--Demesne--Demure
Denouement--Desuetude--Desultory--Diaphanous--Dissemble--Dulcet--Ebullient
Effervescent--Efflorescence--Elision--Elixir--Eloquence--Embrocation--Emollient
Ephemeral--Epiphany--Erstwhile--Esculent--Ethereal--Evanescent--Evocative--Fetching
Felicitous--Fluke--Forbearance--Fugacious--Furtive--Gambol--Glamour--Gossamer
Halcyon--Imbrication--Imbroglio--Imbue--Incipient--Ineffable--Ingenue--Inglenook
Insouciance--Inure--Lagniappe--Lagoon--Languor--Lassitude--Leisure--Lilt--Lissome
Lithe--Luxuriant--Mellifluous--Moiety--Mondegreen--Murmur--Nemesis--Niveous
Odalisque--Offing--Onomatopoeia--Opulent--Palimpsest--Panacea--Panoply--Pastiche
Peccadillo--Penumbra--Petrichor--Plethora--Propinquity--Pyrrhic--Quintessential
Ratatouille--Redolent--Riparian--Ripple--Scintilla--Sempiternal--Seraglio--Serendipity
Surreptitious--Sumptuous--Sussurous--Symbiosis--Talisman--Tintinnabulation
Umbrageous--Umbrella--Untoward--Vestige--Viridescent--Waft--Wherewithal
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
You Just Thought You Knew
“Urban Dictionary is the slang dictionary you wrote. Define your world.”
Wanna see how this on-line dictionary defines the word “book”?
1. book—an object used as a coaster, increase the hight of small children, or increase the stability of poorly built furniture. Example: “Where do you want me to put your drink?” “Oh, just leave it on top of that book.”
2. book—verb meaning to run or to leave in a hurry Example: “I booked when the cops showed up!”
3. book—cool: the first option given when trying to type 'cool' in a text message using t9 “That chick thinks she's book, but she's totally hacked.”
4. book—1. A source of information. 2. A source of entertainment. 3. A tool barely used by todays societies, because it is not 'cool' to read a book. Examples: 1. The dictionary 2. Neil Gaimain's 'American Gods' 3. Which is a shame, really, because once upon a time (and today, in countries with little money) a book was a precious commodity.
6. book—secret word for "booze" Used when near adults or somewhere that you cannot talk about drinking openly. a. a shot is one page b. reading a book means drinking c. being literate means being drunk (since you have "read the book") d. being illiterate means being sober e. the library is the liqour store. Examples: a. “Lets read a few pages!!” b. “I’m gonna read a book.”
c. “Damn man, Bob read so many pages that now he is literate as hell!” d. Bob: "Wanna read a few pages after school man?" Jim: "Naw man, I have a driving lesson and I gotta stay illiterate." e. "Yo, I’m gonna get some books at the library so we can have a lot of it at the party."
7. book—1000 hits of acid. Somebody else posted that it was a hundred. That is incorrect. 100 is a sheet or page. 10 is a strip and 10,000 is a bible. I used to get books for $1450.
8. book—1. An object containing information (ie: words, pictures) used for the purpose of entertainment or education. These are now available in electronic form. One that writes such a 'book' has the ability to earn money known as 'royalty'. 2. To get into trouble with an authority figure such as a teacher or a police officer. 3. To make an escape... usually from an authority figure such as the ones mentioned above. Student 1: “Dude! I forgot to read my book for my report for English Class!” Student 2: “Did the teacher book you?” Student 1: “Na man, I booked before she could find out!”
10. book—An archiac form for bringing information to the masses. Consists of several paper pages with words printed or written directly on them. After the invent of computers, books where a thing of history. Evidently many people on the internet cannot read words with only letters in them, they MUST contain numbers and symbols as well.
13. Book—In the Twilight Zone, an episode which showed the disappearance of humankind, there was one guy left in the world, a bookish type of person that read all the books that he possibly could. In the end of the episode, he finds out he had all the time in the world to read every single book in human history, the problem was, that he broke his glasses, and could not read any book. he screamed "I had all the time in the world!" Lesson of the episode? Dont take things for granted. Books are cool, if you find the time to get interested in one that is.
14. Book—A collection of paper strips, usually bound together and labeled on the cover or binding. The strips, or pages, contain various sections, or chapters, which relate facts or a story. Generally, all topics discussed in the book relate to each other and form a point, which is the main theme of the book. Many books relate stories, whether funny, action-packed, romantic, horrible, dramatic, etc. Some books are very evil and discuss topics boring and very fact-based. These are called School books, and should be burned.
28. book—A piece of literature that people read and write to make themselves feel smart.
33. book—one of the greater objects to fill free time with. Reading a book induces feelings and thoughts not attainable anywhere else.
34. book—A movie that hasn't yet been shot.
38. book--An object that you should never look at,EVER. Boy 1: "I’m gonna read a book." Boy 2: “Nooooooooooooooooooo!!"
48. book—1.best thing in da world 2. worst thing in da world Examples: 1. “I love reading books in my free time.” 2. “Ugh. I have to read 5 books over vacation for English homework.”
49. book—Object that does not give instant gratification, like a computer, a television or a dildo.
52. book—A source of reading, in America and most English speaking countries opens right to left then you read them top to bottom left to right.
53. book—"koob" spelled backwards.
54. book—A now useless form of entertainment Example: “You like books?! You should have real fun and watch TV and play video games! No one has the right to tell people what fun to have! (Mine was just a suggestion.) Those annoying grown-ups have to stop telling us to read instead!!!!!!!!”
55. book--Useless pieces of paper with words on them. Wait- I take that back-FREE ROLLING PAPERS!
Friday, January 30, 2009
Renaming
I love the way families have special words, usually coined by the children. We call a billfold a bofield thanks to our oldest son. He also gave us smell-good for cologne, as in “Dad, can I wear some of your smell-good?” Our daughter renamed the elbow the bowain. And, yes, we do still use these words, but we try not to do it in public.Right now, I’m reading Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, and she shares a couple of her family’s special words:
In a few months we’d be drunk on the scent of Lizzie Webb’s mock oranges and lilacs, but the show begins modestly in April with her tiny Lenten roses, white–petaled snowdrops, and the wildish little daffodils called jonquils that have naturalized all over the grassy slopes. As Lily and I walked single file up the path to the greenhouse, I noticed these were up, poking their snub, yellow-tipped noses through a fringe of leaves.Ah, the joy of children and language.
“Oh, Mama,” Lily cried, “look what’s about to bloom—the tranquils.”
There went the last of the needles of ice around my heart, and I understood I’d be doomed to calling the jonquils tranquils for the rest of my days. Lily is my youngest. Maybe you know how these things go. In our family, those pink birds with the long necks are called flingmos because of how their real name was cutely jumbled by my brother’s youngest child—and that was, yikes, twenty years ago.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Gleanings from My Readings
"We do not look in our great cities for our best morality."
---Jane Austen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Nearly all of us . . . are offended by violations of some kinds of linguistic taboos. Political conservatives tend to be more offended by profanities and obscenities, whereas liberals tend to be more offended by racial and ethnic slurs as well as by slurs against homosexuals. Pinker says that words are arbitrary labels and that linguistic taboos embody a kind of magical misconception about language. In fact, though, speakers within a linguistic community typically show widespread agreement about the relative offensiveness of words. Linguistic taboos are real, then, not magical.”
---Gilbert Youmans, Emeritus Professor of English, University of Missouri, in a letter to the editor of The Atlantic (Jan/Feb 2009)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“[Both my mother and the librarian] taught me that if you insist on having a destination when you come into a library, you’re shortchanging yourself. . . . I have found sanctuary in libraries my whole life, and there is sanctuary there now, from the war, from the storms of our families and our own minds. Libraries are like mountains or meadows or creeks: sacred space.”
---Anne Lamott, in Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps; for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are, and what they ought to be.”
---William Hazlitt, in his essay “On Wit and Humour”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Language is to some extent tendentious. This is what we have to work with. Think of words in terms of foodstuffs: whatever we cook up won’t be composed of pure nutrients: it will derive from odd life-forms that breathe underwater of grow in the ground. But we can use fresh, organic ingredients, we can wash contaminants off them, and we can avoid globbing them up with heavy batter and frying them in oils that clog our arteries. Actually, it’s a lot harder to do that with words than with trout or carrots, but it’s the goal for an honest writer to aspire to.”
---Roy Blount, Jr., in Alphabet Juice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy Reading!
---Jane Austen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Nearly all of us . . . are offended by violations of some kinds of linguistic taboos. Political conservatives tend to be more offended by profanities and obscenities, whereas liberals tend to be more offended by racial and ethnic slurs as well as by slurs against homosexuals. Pinker says that words are arbitrary labels and that linguistic taboos embody a kind of magical misconception about language. In fact, though, speakers within a linguistic community typically show widespread agreement about the relative offensiveness of words. Linguistic taboos are real, then, not magical.”
---Gilbert Youmans, Emeritus Professor of English, University of Missouri, in a letter to the editor of The Atlantic (Jan/Feb 2009)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“[Both my mother and the librarian] taught me that if you insist on having a destination when you come into a library, you’re shortchanging yourself. . . . I have found sanctuary in libraries my whole life, and there is sanctuary there now, from the war, from the storms of our families and our own minds. Libraries are like mountains or meadows or creeks: sacred space.”
---Anne Lamott, in Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps; for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are, and what they ought to be.”
---William Hazlitt, in his essay “On Wit and Humour”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Language is to some extent tendentious. This is what we have to work with. Think of words in terms of foodstuffs: whatever we cook up won’t be composed of pure nutrients: it will derive from odd life-forms that breathe underwater of grow in the ground. But we can use fresh, organic ingredients, we can wash contaminants off them, and we can avoid globbing them up with heavy batter and frying them in oils that clog our arteries. Actually, it’s a lot harder to do that with words than with trout or carrots, but it’s the goal for an honest writer to aspire to.”
---Roy Blount, Jr., in Alphabet Juice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy Reading!
Friday, January 23, 2009
It's the Adverb's Fault!
Steven Pinker of the New York Times explains HERE why Roberts flubbed while administering of the presidential Oath of Office. It's a grammar thing, folks.Saturday, December 27, 2008
Gleanings from My Readings
“Men have had every advantage of us in telling their own story. Education has been theirs in so much higher a degree; the pen has been in their hands. I will not allow books to prove anything.”
---Jane Austen, in Persuasion
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Few of us have the temperament of monks. Most of us draw sustenance from the human drama. We might recognize the tremulous signals emanating from some invisible inner universe, but most of us see no choice but to live in the world, to engage in commerce, to seek delight in people and things around us. Perhaps when we knock wood to preserve our luck, what we’re really doing is convincing ourselves of the solidity of the present, distinguishing the actual from the wishful.”
---Philip Martin, Arkansas Democrat Gazette columnist
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actual title of new workout video: Bollywood Booty. I’m not kidding. Not only will this video help you “stay fit and get firm,” it will also “help you release your inhibitions.” Isn’t that what everyone looks for in a workout?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“To me, letters have always been a robust medium of sublimation. I don’t remember what I was like before I learned my ABC’s, but for as long as I can remember I have made them with my fingers and felt them in my bones.”
“I do hope you realize that every time you use disinterested to mean uninterested, an angel dies, and every time you write very unique, or “We will hire whomever is more qualified,” thousands of literate people lose yet another smidgen of hope. And please promise me you will never lose your grip on the subjunctive.”
---Ray Blount, Jr., in the Introduction to Alphabet Juice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“The problem with God—or at any rate, one of the top five most annoying things about God—is that He or She rarely answers right away. It can take days, weeks. Some people seem to understand this—that life and change take time. . . . I, on the other hand, am an instant-message type.”
---Anne Lamott, from Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Donne’s “A Hymn to God the Father” (1633):
I.
WILT Thou forgive that sin where I begun,
Which was my sin, though it were done before?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin through which I run,
And do run still, though still I do deplore?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done;
For I have more.
II.
Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I have won
Others to sin, and made my sins their door?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I did shun
A year or two, but wallow'd in a score?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done;
For I have more.
III.
I have a sin of fear, that when I've spun
My last thread, I shall perish on the shore;
But swear by Thyself that at my death Thy Son
Shall shine as He shines now and heretofore:
And having done that, Thou hast done;
I fear no more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy Reading!
---Jane Austen, in Persuasion
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Few of us have the temperament of monks. Most of us draw sustenance from the human drama. We might recognize the tremulous signals emanating from some invisible inner universe, but most of us see no choice but to live in the world, to engage in commerce, to seek delight in people and things around us. Perhaps when we knock wood to preserve our luck, what we’re really doing is convincing ourselves of the solidity of the present, distinguishing the actual from the wishful.”
---Philip Martin, Arkansas Democrat Gazette columnist
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actual title of new workout video: Bollywood Booty. I’m not kidding. Not only will this video help you “stay fit and get firm,” it will also “help you release your inhibitions.” Isn’t that what everyone looks for in a workout?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“To me, letters have always been a robust medium of sublimation. I don’t remember what I was like before I learned my ABC’s, but for as long as I can remember I have made them with my fingers and felt them in my bones.”
“I do hope you realize that every time you use disinterested to mean uninterested, an angel dies, and every time you write very unique, or “We will hire whomever is more qualified,” thousands of literate people lose yet another smidgen of hope. And please promise me you will never lose your grip on the subjunctive.”
---Ray Blount, Jr., in the Introduction to Alphabet Juice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“The problem with God—or at any rate, one of the top five most annoying things about God—is that He or She rarely answers right away. It can take days, weeks. Some people seem to understand this—that life and change take time. . . . I, on the other hand, am an instant-message type.”
---Anne Lamott, from Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Donne’s “A Hymn to God the Father” (1633):
I.
WILT Thou forgive that sin where I begun,
Which was my sin, though it were done before?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin through which I run,
And do run still, though still I do deplore?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done;
For I have more.
II.
Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I have won
Others to sin, and made my sins their door?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I did shun
A year or two, but wallow'd in a score?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done;
For I have more.
III.
I have a sin of fear, that when I've spun
My last thread, I shall perish on the shore;
But swear by Thyself that at my death Thy Son
Shall shine as He shines now and heretofore:
And having done that, Thou hast done;
I fear no more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy Reading!
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Breaking News: Scientists Validate the Metaphor
I read the other day about a recent scientific experiment. The scientists chose a group of people, secretly divided them into thirds, put them in a room, and instructed them to mingle. One third was “in the know,” one third was a control group, and those of the last third were the subjects of the experiment.
The “in the know” group had been instructed to treat the control group normally but to stare down, ignore, snub, and generally be rude to the subjects of the experiment.
Afterwards, both the control group and the subjects were interviewed about their experience. Among other questions, they were asked to estimate the temperature of the room. Those who were treated rudely consistently rated the room as colder than the control group.
From this, the scientists concluded that metaphors like “an icy stare” and “the cold shoulder” corresponded to actual physiological reactions, and were therefore valid.
My reaction to this newsworthy achievement? Boy, I could have saved them a lot of time and money.
The “in the know” group had been instructed to treat the control group normally but to stare down, ignore, snub, and generally be rude to the subjects of the experiment.
Afterwards, both the control group and the subjects were interviewed about their experience. Among other questions, they were asked to estimate the temperature of the room. Those who were treated rudely consistently rated the room as colder than the control group.
From this, the scientists concluded that metaphors like “an icy stare” and “the cold shoulder” corresponded to actual physiological reactions, and were therefore valid.
My reaction to this newsworthy achievement? Boy, I could have saved them a lot of time and money.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Listen Up!
Does the thought of fighting through crowds at the mall on Black Friday send you into a depression?
The oral-history organization StoryCorps has a relaxing alternative. They’ve declared the Friday after Thanksgiving a National Day of Listening. The purpose of the event is to give family members a reason to sit down and have intimate conversations that can be recorded and preserved as heirlooms. StoryCorps founder Dave Isay explains that “this is the kind of project that can help us through difficult times by remembering what’s really important, and that all of our lives matter.”
Gail Ostrow, a 64-year-old college professor plans to interview her husband. “There are things I want to know about him that don’t come up in conversation,” she explains. After interviewing her mother last year, 8th grader Ally Stein reveals the she got “closer with her. I can tell her things now that I thought I wouldn’t be able to.”
According to StoryCorps, “the experience creates more than a historical record to share with future generations. It can break down barriers and provide an opening for otherwise reserved participants to clearly voice their emotions.”
What a gift—the power of shared narrative. And you don’t have to get up at 4 am to beat the crowds.
Oh, if you do decide to go shopping, here are three gifts to avoid:
--Rehab Barbie
--Vet-me Elmo
--Monopoly: The Bailout Edition
The oral-history organization StoryCorps has a relaxing alternative. They’ve declared the Friday after Thanksgiving a National Day of Listening. The purpose of the event is to give family members a reason to sit down and have intimate conversations that can be recorded and preserved as heirlooms. StoryCorps founder Dave Isay explains that “this is the kind of project that can help us through difficult times by remembering what’s really important, and that all of our lives matter.”
Gail Ostrow, a 64-year-old college professor plans to interview her husband. “There are things I want to know about him that don’t come up in conversation,” she explains. After interviewing her mother last year, 8th grader Ally Stein reveals the she got “closer with her. I can tell her things now that I thought I wouldn’t be able to.”
According to StoryCorps, “the experience creates more than a historical record to share with future generations. It can break down barriers and provide an opening for otherwise reserved participants to clearly voice their emotions.”
What a gift—the power of shared narrative. And you don’t have to get up at 4 am to beat the crowds.
Oh, if you do decide to go shopping, here are three gifts to avoid:
--Rehab Barbie
--Vet-me Elmo
--Monopoly: The Bailout Edition
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Word Nerd
There were early clues. Take the Dictionary Game, for instance (see 7/31/08 post), or the embarrassing fact that I really liked the Vocabulary lessons in school. Realizing that I have always flipped through each new issue of Reader’s Digest to find the “Word Power” section first would have alerted a more self-aware person, and having one dictionary in my office, one by my chair at home, one downloaded on my laptop, and an electronic one in my purse probably should have tipped me off.
Buying a book called Reading the OED: One Man, One Year, 21,730 Pages really should have been the final straw. But when I read a review of a book by Roy Blount, Jr. titled
and got really excited about buying it, I recognized the truth: I am a Word Nerd.
Blount is a prolific writer in many genres. He’s written essays and novels, reported on sports, compiled a humorous anthology, written cultural commentary and light verse. He’s acted occasionally, is an oral storyteller, a lecturer, and a regular on NPR’s quiz show Wait, Wait . . . Don’t Tell Me. He’s a contributing editor for the Atlantic Monthly and a usage adviser to the American Heritage Dictionary. It sure sounds like he’s qualified to write a book about words.
Reviewer Michael Dirda explains,
Dirda reveals that the book contains many lists, such as Blount’s favorite one-word, two-word, and three-word sentences. For example: “Fuhgeddaboudit.” “Jesus wept.” and “Call me Ishmael.” Blount discusses eccentric names in life and literature, takes jabs at politicians, and celebrates “the New York Times, the South, and lively English.”
Blount may have dubbed himself a “shade-tree lexicographer,” but this Word Nerd is definitely impressed. And headed to the bookstore.
[For the complete review, see “Blount’s bountiful wit infuses Alphabet Juice” in the 10/19/08 edition of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 4H]
Buying a book called Reading the OED: One Man, One Year, 21,730 Pages really should have been the final straw. But when I read a review of a book by Roy Blount, Jr. titled
Alphabet Juice: The Energies, Gists and Spirits of Letters, Words and Combinations Thereof; Their Roots, Bones, Innards, Piths, Pips and Secret Parts, Tinctures, Tonics and Essences; With Examples of Their Usage Foul and Savory
and got really excited about buying it, I recognized the truth: I am a Word Nerd.
Blount is a prolific writer in many genres. He’s written essays and novels, reported on sports, compiled a humorous anthology, written cultural commentary and light verse. He’s acted occasionally, is an oral storyteller, a lecturer, and a regular on NPR’s quiz show Wait, Wait . . . Don’t Tell Me. He’s a contributing editor for the Atlantic Monthly and a usage adviser to the American Heritage Dictionary. It sure sounds like he’s qualified to write a book about words.
Reviewer Michael Dirda explains,
“The title Alphabet Juice derives from its author’s contention that sound and sense are often strikingly related, that certain letters and combinations of letters possess a gut-level electricity, and that ‘through centuries of knockabout breeding and intimate contact with the human body’ some words ‘have absorbed the uncanny power to carry the ring of truth.’ A high-fiber word like ‘grunt’ sounds right for what it means. Good diction thus tends to be sonicky. Blount’s neologism for that ‘quality of a word whose sound doesn’t imitate a sound, like boom or poof, but does somehow sensuously evoke the essence of the word: queasy or rickety or zest or sluggish or vim.’ To write well, then, we need to use our tongue and ears, not only our mind and fingers.”
Dirda reveals that the book contains many lists, such as Blount’s favorite one-word, two-word, and three-word sentences. For example: “Fuhgeddaboudit.” “Jesus wept.” and “Call me Ishmael.” Blount discusses eccentric names in life and literature, takes jabs at politicians, and celebrates “the New York Times, the South, and lively English.”
Blount may have dubbed himself a “shade-tree lexicographer,” but this Word Nerd is definitely impressed. And headed to the bookstore.
[For the complete review, see “Blount’s bountiful wit infuses Alphabet Juice” in the 10/19/08 edition of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 4H]
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Fun with Words
If lawyers are disbarred and clergymen defrocked, doesn't it follow that electricians can be delighted, musicians denoted, cowboys deranged, models deposed and dry cleaners depressed?
Laundry workers could decrease, eventually becoming depressed and depleted! Even more, bedmakers will be debunked, baseball players will be debased, landscapers will be deflowered, bulldozer operators will be degraded, software engineers will be detested, and even musical composers will eventually decompose.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Brother, Can You Spare $895?
I just found out, courtesy of an ad in Harper’s magazine, that for a mere $895.00, I can get my very own 20-volume copy of The Oxford English Dictionary. It’s on sale! Original list price: $3000! The lowest price ever offered!
I’m not quite sure where I’d put all twenty volumes, but I don’t know an English major alive who wouldn’t secretly love to have his or her own copy of the OED. It’s really a lot more than a dictionary; it’s an encyclopedia of the English language. It was originally commissioned by the members of the Philological Society of London in 1857. They proposed a ten-year project, but the first edition actually took seventy years to complete. It contains definitions, pronunciations, etymologies, cross references, and quotations. The 1933 Preface states:
The second edition is the one on sale now, and there’s a third edition in the works.
The OED is an amazingly ambitious project, but I think Samuel Johnson beat them hands down. The OED has always been produced by a committee (and remember, the 1st edition took seventy years to complete); the 3rd edition now in progress is the work of more than 300 scholars, readers, researchers, and consultants. Compare that to Johnson’s feat. As the editors of the Longman Anthology of British Literature explain, Johnson’s Dictionary, published in 1755, was
“a nearly superhuman accomplishment.” In seven years, a single author defined 40,000 words “with unprecedented exactitude, and illustrated [them] with more than 114,000 passages drawn from English prose and poetry of the previous 250 years.”
“To explain a language by itself is very difficult,” Johnson writes in his Preface. I’ll say! Have you ever tried to define a word and found it difficult to do without using the word itself? Unless it’s a definition I’ve memorized, my definitions sound something like this: “Uh, it’s when you . . .uh . . .” or “Umm, it’s kinda like . . . no, more like . . .” I know what the word means, but explaining it is a different story. Imagine defining 40,000 words and then combing through the literary canon trying to find the best examples of all the different ways you can use those words. By yourself. Without a computer. No search engines; no databases. I can't imagine taking on such a task.
Johnson was a little hard on himself, I think. He continued, “That part of my work on which I expect malignity most frequently to fasten is the explanation; in which I cannot hope to satisfy those who are perhaps not inclined to be pleased, since I have not always been able to satisfy myself.”
Well, rather than “malign,” I stand in awe.
I’m not quite sure where I’d put all twenty volumes, but I don’t know an English major alive who wouldn’t secretly love to have his or her own copy of the OED. It’s really a lot more than a dictionary; it’s an encyclopedia of the English language. It was originally commissioned by the members of the Philological Society of London in 1857. They proposed a ten-year project, but the first edition actually took seventy years to complete. It contains definitions, pronunciations, etymologies, cross references, and quotations. The 1933 Preface states:
The aim of this Dictionary is to present in alphabetical series the words that have formed the English vocabulary from the time of the earliest records [ca. AD740] down to the present day, with all the relevant facts concerning their form, sense-history, pronunciation, and etymology. It embraces not only the standard language of literature and conversation, whether current at the moment, or obsolete, or archaic, but also the main technical vocabulary, and a large measure of dialectal usage and slang.
The second edition is the one on sale now, and there’s a third edition in the works.
The OED is an amazingly ambitious project, but I think Samuel Johnson beat them hands down. The OED has always been produced by a committee (and remember, the 1st edition took seventy years to complete); the 3rd edition now in progress is the work of more than 300 scholars, readers, researchers, and consultants. Compare that to Johnson’s feat. As the editors of the Longman Anthology of British Literature explain, Johnson’s Dictionary, published in 1755, was
“a nearly superhuman accomplishment.” In seven years, a single author defined 40,000 words “with unprecedented exactitude, and illustrated [them] with more than 114,000 passages drawn from English prose and poetry of the previous 250 years.”“To explain a language by itself is very difficult,” Johnson writes in his Preface. I’ll say! Have you ever tried to define a word and found it difficult to do without using the word itself? Unless it’s a definition I’ve memorized, my definitions sound something like this: “Uh, it’s when you . . .uh . . .” or “Umm, it’s kinda like . . . no, more like . . .” I know what the word means, but explaining it is a different story. Imagine defining 40,000 words and then combing through the literary canon trying to find the best examples of all the different ways you can use those words. By yourself. Without a computer. No search engines; no databases. I can't imagine taking on such a task.
Johnson was a little hard on himself, I think. He continued, “That part of my work on which I expect malignity most frequently to fasten is the explanation; in which I cannot hope to satisfy those who are perhaps not inclined to be pleased, since I have not always been able to satisfy myself.”
Well, rather than “malign,” I stand in awe.
Friday, September 12, 2008
As Promised
As promised, here are the ten most-difficult-to-translate English words. According to the same source, they are:
1. plenipotentiary
2. gobbledegook
3. serendipity
4. poppycock
5. googly
6. Spam
7. whimsy
8. bumf
9. chuffed
10. kitsch
There are some pretty interesting words here. Some of them are just plain fun to say, but I bet you’ll have to have a dictionary for a few of them. I did.
OK. I have to admit that I can't help but wonder why anybody would even eat Spam, much less speak about it in a situation that has to be translated. Maybe they are warning newcomers to our great country: "Enjoy yourselves. Live it up. But whatever else you do while you're in America, don't eat the Spam!"
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Richness and Complexity
One really good definition of poetry is “condensed language.” A poet chooses words and images that are deep, and wide, and richly textured, and to “translate” the poem into prose would take many, many more words that the poet used to get across the same idea.
Think about the twenty-third Psalm, a pastoral poem. It only has six verses, and you could read it aloud in, what, two minutes? Now think about how many preachers have preached half-hour or forty-five minute sermons on that psalm. Go to a Bible bookstore and see how many books you can find attempting to explain the richness and complexity contained in those six verses. See what I mean?
Well, some words themselves are like that. They are deep and complex. If you look them up in the dictionary, you find a paragraph rather than a simple phrase.
But it gets even more complicated when we try to translate certain words from another language. When foreign words are translated into English, what we often get is the literal, exact meaning of the word, minus all its cultural connotations. Often, no one English word quite manages to convey all the associations the word brings forth in its original language.
One such word is the German heimat. Translated literally into English, we get the word “home,” but this translation is woefully short of a German’s understanding of this complicated word. Heimat includes all these ideas and more: home; origin, birthplace of oneself and one’s ancestors; security, attachment, and joy; an uncontaminated space, a realm of innocence and immediacy; ideas of language and regional identity are encompassed in this term; it implies patriotism without nationalism; it is a somewhat sentimental term, yet it encompasses a history that is not always pleasant to recall.
I ran across another interesting foreign word in the book I’ve been reading by Krista Tippett. She shares the South African word ubuntu, a word that, she explains, “is suggestive of humanity. It means ‘I am through you, and you are through me. To the extent that I am estranged from another person, I am less than human.’” I don’t think that will translate to any one English word that I know, but isn't it a beautiful word?
Well, after being introduced to the word ubuntu, I wondered about other hard-to-translate words. According to Today Translation, who consulted one thousand linguists, these are the ten hardest to translate words:
1. Ilunga: Bantu language of Tshiluba for "a person who is ready to forgive any abuse for the first time, to tolerate it a second time, but never a third time." However, there is no independent evidence that the word actually means what the translation company claims. When asked for confirmation by one reporter, representatives of the Congo government recognized the word only as a personal name. Furthermore, the translation company failed to respond to inquiries regarding the survey.
2. Shlimazl (שלימזל): Yiddish for a chronically unlucky person. (Cf. Schlemiel). (NOTE. In colloquial Italian, it is very common to use the word sfigato with exactly the same meaning, in Dutch and German one says pechvogel, also used in colloq. German is the word schlamassel, if you are in an unlucky situation)
3. Radiostukacz: Polish for a person who worked as a telegraphist for the resistance movements on the Soviet side of the Iron Curtain. It is not a real word, only a mistake or a hoax.
4. Naa (なぁ or なー): Japanese word only used in the Kansai (関西) area of Japan, especially in Osaka (大阪府), to emphasize statements or agree with someone.
5. Altahmam (التهمام) †: Arabic for a kind of deep sadness.
6. Gezellig †: Dutch for cosy (room, house, chair, etc.), pleasant (evening spent with friends), friendly (atmosphere).Gesellig German for spending time with friends.
7. Saudade †: Portuguese for a certain type of longing.
8. Selathirupavar † (செல்லாதிருப்பவர்): Tamil for a certain type of truancy.
9. Pochemuchka (почемучка): Russian for a person who asks a lot of questions (usually a kid).
10. Klloshar †: Albanian for loser. Could be derived from French clochard.
I don’t recognize any of these words, except for number Six, which has obvious ties to our old friend gezelligheit, and possibly number Two, which sounds like a word in the old Laverne and Shirley chant, “Shlimeel, shlimazl, . . . .”
Tune in tomorrow for their list of the hardest English words to translate.
Think about the twenty-third Psalm, a pastoral poem. It only has six verses, and you could read it aloud in, what, two minutes? Now think about how many preachers have preached half-hour or forty-five minute sermons on that psalm. Go to a Bible bookstore and see how many books you can find attempting to explain the richness and complexity contained in those six verses. See what I mean?
Well, some words themselves are like that. They are deep and complex. If you look them up in the dictionary, you find a paragraph rather than a simple phrase.
But it gets even more complicated when we try to translate certain words from another language. When foreign words are translated into English, what we often get is the literal, exact meaning of the word, minus all its cultural connotations. Often, no one English word quite manages to convey all the associations the word brings forth in its original language.
One such word is the German heimat. Translated literally into English, we get the word “home,” but this translation is woefully short of a German’s understanding of this complicated word. Heimat includes all these ideas and more: home; origin, birthplace of oneself and one’s ancestors; security, attachment, and joy; an uncontaminated space, a realm of innocence and immediacy; ideas of language and regional identity are encompassed in this term; it implies patriotism without nationalism; it is a somewhat sentimental term, yet it encompasses a history that is not always pleasant to recall.
I ran across another interesting foreign word in the book I’ve been reading by Krista Tippett. She shares the South African word ubuntu, a word that, she explains, “is suggestive of humanity. It means ‘I am through you, and you are through me. To the extent that I am estranged from another person, I am less than human.’” I don’t think that will translate to any one English word that I know, but isn't it a beautiful word?
Well, after being introduced to the word ubuntu, I wondered about other hard-to-translate words. According to Today Translation, who consulted one thousand linguists, these are the ten hardest to translate words:
1. Ilunga: Bantu language of Tshiluba for "a person who is ready to forgive any abuse for the first time, to tolerate it a second time, but never a third time." However, there is no independent evidence that the word actually means what the translation company claims. When asked for confirmation by one reporter, representatives of the Congo government recognized the word only as a personal name. Furthermore, the translation company failed to respond to inquiries regarding the survey.
2. Shlimazl (שלימזל): Yiddish for a chronically unlucky person. (Cf. Schlemiel). (NOTE. In colloquial Italian, it is very common to use the word sfigato with exactly the same meaning, in Dutch and German one says pechvogel, also used in colloq. German is the word schlamassel, if you are in an unlucky situation)
3. Radiostukacz: Polish for a person who worked as a telegraphist for the resistance movements on the Soviet side of the Iron Curtain. It is not a real word, only a mistake or a hoax.
4. Naa (なぁ or なー): Japanese word only used in the Kansai (関西) area of Japan, especially in Osaka (大阪府), to emphasize statements or agree with someone.
5. Altahmam (التهمام) †: Arabic for a kind of deep sadness.
6. Gezellig †: Dutch for cosy (room, house, chair, etc.), pleasant (evening spent with friends), friendly (atmosphere).Gesellig German for spending time with friends.
7. Saudade †: Portuguese for a certain type of longing.
8. Selathirupavar † (செல்லாதிருப்பவர்): Tamil for a certain type of truancy.
9. Pochemuchka (почемучка): Russian for a person who asks a lot of questions (usually a kid).
10. Klloshar †: Albanian for loser. Could be derived from French clochard.
I don’t recognize any of these words, except for number Six, which has obvious ties to our old friend gezelligheit, and possibly number Two, which sounds like a word in the old Laverne and Shirley chant, “Shlimeel, shlimazl, . . . .”
Tune in tomorrow for their list of the hardest English words to translate.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Sunday Funnies
A linguistics professor was lecturing his class the other day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive. However, in some languages, such as Russian, a double negative remains a negative. But there isn't a single language, not one, in which a double positive can express a negative."
A voice from the back of the room retorted, "Yeah, right."
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Birthdays and Dirty Words
Today is my youngest child’s birthday, and since I am the one who suffered excruciating pain and anguish to bring him into the world, I believe that I have been endowed by my Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Right to tell Stories that might prove Embarassing to him.
If you have been a faithful reader of my blog, you’ll know that I am drawn to new and interesting words. Well, my youngest son inherited this trait, but with a twist. He was the child that just had to repeat a new word if he encountered it, especially if it was one that would ultimately bring Shame and Reproach upon his parents.
In an earlier post (8/1/08 Things I Wish I’d Done #2), I related one such incident. Here, for your reading pleasure and to increase my joy on his birthday, is the further adventure of “Trent Learns About New Words”:
Do you remember the little rubber wrestling men? Well, courtesy of a great aunt and uncle, he had two of them, and one day, while his brother and sister were in school, he contentedly engaged them in mortal combat. I was sitting, calmly enjoying my counted cross stitch, when my peace was rudely shattered by his words: “I’ll kill you, you son of a %*@#*!” he shouted, using one little rubber man to slam the other to the ground.
Trying to remain calm and not impress the new vocabulary words indelibly on his brain, I asked, “Son, why did you say that? Where in the world did you hear those words?”
“That detective man said it to the bad guy on TV last night,” he replied.
Now, I knew he wasn’t being “bad.” In fact, he was doing what all of us do—we hear new words, figure out what they mean and how to use them from context, and then implement them in our own Speaking Vocabularies. What he needed, I decided, was a tool to help him learn proper discretion. So, I talked to him about how some words were great to use and others were not so great, and I told him that if he ever heard a new word that he had never heard mommy or daddy use, he had to tell one of us about the word first.
Well, a few days later he was in the farm shop with his older brother. Ever the inquisitive child, he asked, “Travis, what is oil for?”
“It’s used to lubricate things,” Travis replied.
“Lubricate! Travis, have you ever heard mommy or daddy use that word?”
Ah, if he’d only remained as easily guided by my wise maxims, what trouble we might have avoided through the teenage years. . .
Happy Birthday, Trent. I’m proud of you. And you can repeat that
If you have been a faithful reader of my blog, you’ll know that I am drawn to new and interesting words. Well, my youngest son inherited this trait, but with a twist. He was the child that just had to repeat a new word if he encountered it, especially if it was one that would ultimately bring Shame and Reproach upon his parents.
In an earlier post (8/1/08 Things I Wish I’d Done #2), I related one such incident. Here, for your reading pleasure and to increase my joy on his birthday, is the further adventure of “Trent Learns About New Words”:
Do you remember the little rubber wrestling men? Well, courtesy of a great aunt and uncle, he had two of them, and one day, while his brother and sister were in school, he contentedly engaged them in mortal combat. I was sitting, calmly enjoying my counted cross stitch, when my peace was rudely shattered by his words: “I’ll kill you, you son of a %*@#*!” he shouted, using one little rubber man to slam the other to the ground.
Trying to remain calm and not impress the new vocabulary words indelibly on his brain, I asked, “Son, why did you say that? Where in the world did you hear those words?”
“That detective man said it to the bad guy on TV last night,” he replied.
Now, I knew he wasn’t being “bad.” In fact, he was doing what all of us do—we hear new words, figure out what they mean and how to use them from context, and then implement them in our own Speaking Vocabularies. What he needed, I decided, was a tool to help him learn proper discretion. So, I talked to him about how some words were great to use and others were not so great, and I told him that if he ever heard a new word that he had never heard mommy or daddy use, he had to tell one of us about the word first.
Well, a few days later he was in the farm shop with his older brother. Ever the inquisitive child, he asked, “Travis, what is oil for?”
“It’s used to lubricate things,” Travis replied.
“Lubricate! Travis, have you ever heard mommy or daddy use that word?”
Ah, if he’d only remained as easily guided by my wise maxims, what trouble we might have avoided through the teenage years. . .
Happy Birthday, Trent. I’m proud of you. And you can repeat that
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Emotional Spaces
psy-cho-log-i-cal (adj) 1. a. of or relating to psychology (the science of mind and behavior) b. mental 2. directed toward the will or toward the mind specifically in its conative function
From the above definition, courtesy of Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, one would naturally assume that the word psychological would be used, most likely even exclusively, in some context related to human beings. Right? Maybe animals at a stretch, but inanimate objects? Surely not.
Oh, but you forget we have a wonderfully adaptive language we call American English.
According to real estate lawyer Tim Grooms, the State of Arkansas has a “ghost-buster bill” that prevents sellers and agents from being sued over paranormal activity. This code protects agents who fail to disclose “any fact or circumstance or suspicion of the existence of any fact or circumstance that indicates that the real property is psychologically impacted” (emphasis mine). Arkansas law defines property that is “psychologically impacted” as any property that “was at any time suspected to have been the site of a homicide, suicide, or felony.”
Before selling a property, the seller is required to fill out a disclosure informing the selling agent about any unusual events that might affect a property’s marketability. Although ghosts aren’t necessarily spelled out in any legal clause, a representative of the Arkansas State Realtors Association explains, “If a seller tells his agent there is something floating around in there, the agent is probably obligated to tell their buyer about it.”
I think it’s really interesting that we’re not talking about terrified, psychologically impacted inhabitants, but the actual house itself. This reminds me of the opening of Shirley Jackson’s 1959 novel The Haunting of Hill House. The novel begins, “No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for eighty years and might stand for eighty more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met neatly, floors were firm, and doors were sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.” Oooooh. And it only gets better.
Well, I don’t think my house is terrified or insane, but it just might be a little depressed. I’ve noticed it’s letting itself go a little. I wonder if it needs therapy?
From the above definition, courtesy of Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, one would naturally assume that the word psychological would be used, most likely even exclusively, in some context related to human beings. Right? Maybe animals at a stretch, but inanimate objects? Surely not.
Oh, but you forget we have a wonderfully adaptive language we call American English.
According to real estate lawyer Tim Grooms, the State of Arkansas has a “ghost-buster bill” that prevents sellers and agents from being sued over paranormal activity. This code protects agents who fail to disclose “any fact or circumstance or suspicion of the existence of any fact or circumstance that indicates that the real property is psychologically impacted” (emphasis mine). Arkansas law defines property that is “psychologically impacted” as any property that “was at any time suspected to have been the site of a homicide, suicide, or felony.”
Before selling a property, the seller is required to fill out a disclosure informing the selling agent about any unusual events that might affect a property’s marketability. Although ghosts aren’t necessarily spelled out in any legal clause, a representative of the Arkansas State Realtors Association explains, “If a seller tells his agent there is something floating around in there, the agent is probably obligated to tell their buyer about it.”
I think it’s really interesting that we’re not talking about terrified, psychologically impacted inhabitants, but the actual house itself. This reminds me of the opening of Shirley Jackson’s 1959 novel The Haunting of Hill House. The novel begins, “No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for eighty years and might stand for eighty more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met neatly, floors were firm, and doors were sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.” Oooooh. And it only gets better.
Well, I don’t think my house is terrified or insane, but it just might be a little depressed. I’ve noticed it’s letting itself go a little. I wonder if it needs therapy?
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Ungossip
You’ve probably seen the movie Pay It Forward, based on a novel by Catherine Ryan Hyde, in which a young boy develops a plan to change the world. He describes his plan like this: “You see, I do something real good for three people. And then when they ask how they can pay it back, I say they have to Pay It Forward. To three more people. Each. So nine people get helped. Then those people have to do twenty-seven." Trevor’s plan is simple but effective. In a world where people are often indifferent and sometimes even hurtful, he wants to be an expanding force for good.
So do I. And one way I try to spread goodwill rather than hurt is by what I call ungossip. It’s just what it sounds like—the exact opposite of gossip. Instead of maliciously passing on words that wound and tear relationships apart, I share words that heal and build bridges. Here’s how it works. Every time I hear someone say something good about someone else, I pass it on to the person being spoken about, or at least to a family member. So if someone tells me what a nice young man so-and-so is, and I run into his mother in the grocery store, I ungossip. If a man tells me something complimentary about his wife, the next time I see her, I ungossip. If a fellow-student tells me that he absolutely loved Professor XYZ’s class, during my next conference with the professor, I ungossip. Everybody benefits. The people who have been complimented feel the joy of being appreciated, they feel a special connection to the person who has complimented them and usually express it the next time they meet, and I feel pleasure in being the one to promote harmony rather than discord.
It’s not hard to do. It’s not time consuming. It’s nothing obsessive. It is just a simple way to make the world a better place
So do I. And one way I try to spread goodwill rather than hurt is by what I call ungossip. It’s just what it sounds like—the exact opposite of gossip. Instead of maliciously passing on words that wound and tear relationships apart, I share words that heal and build bridges. Here’s how it works. Every time I hear someone say something good about someone else, I pass it on to the person being spoken about, or at least to a family member. So if someone tells me what a nice young man so-and-so is, and I run into his mother in the grocery store, I ungossip. If a man tells me something complimentary about his wife, the next time I see her, I ungossip. If a fellow-student tells me that he absolutely loved Professor XYZ’s class, during my next conference with the professor, I ungossip. Everybody benefits. The people who have been complimented feel the joy of being appreciated, they feel a special connection to the person who has complimented them and usually express it the next time they meet, and I feel pleasure in being the one to promote harmony rather than discord.
It’s not hard to do. It’s not time consuming. It’s nothing obsessive. It is just a simple way to make the world a better place
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Educated Mispronunciations
If you’re a reader, you realize that there are lots of words that you read every day but never really hear anyone use in conversation. You recognize these words and understand their meanings, but they are not words that seem to fit into your everyday speech. This is called your Reading Vocabulary. (You actually have four different vocabularies—Reading, Writing, Listening, and Speaking.)
Now, just because you’ve never said these words aloud or heard anyone else pronounce them, doesn’t mean you don’t “say” them inside your head, and you can drift along for years, comfortable in your verbal ignorance. The big shock comes when you finally hear an educated person, your professor, for instance, use the word in a lecture, and you suddenly realize that you have always said the word incorrectly in your head. These mispronunciations usually consist of putting the emphasis on the wrong syllable, but occasionally you may have mangled a word almost beyond recognition. You are mortified and console yourself by thinking, “Thank goodness I never said the word aloud in public!” all the while wondering how many times you have humiliated yourself without being smart enough to even realize it. You discover that ignorance is not bliss.
Now, of course, you want examples. You want me to humiliate myself before you. Okay, okay, I will abandon my pride. The first instance of my pronunciative ignorance (I think I just coined a new word) began in my preteen days. My favorite reading material was a series of mystery novels, the Trixie Belden collection, and I think I had about eighteen of them. In these novels, Trixie’s brother Mart had an old jalopy. Now, in my head I pronounced this word JAlopy, with the emphasis on the first syllable. (As an aside, as I now think back, I am amazed at how many times the author felt the need to use this word throughout the course of these eighteen books. She must have liked how it sounded or enjoyed the appearance of it on the page.) When I finally heard someone say the word on television, I realized it was pronounced jaLOPy, with the emphasis on the second syllable. This discovery did not bother me too much because jalopy is not a word that a teenager just throws around, and even if I had decided to use it, I didn’t figure that any of my friends would have known what the word meant or how to pronounce it anyway.
Not so with this second illustration of my ignorance. I had seen the Latin term ad infinitum, meaning without limit or end, and, basing my pronunciation on the word "infinity," I assumed it was pronounced ad inFINitum. Wrong again. After hearing one of my professors use it in class, I discovered that it’s pronounced ad infinEYEtum. After class, I made straight for a dictionary, and sure enough, the professor was right and I was wrong. Imagine that.
I have never been a stranger to dictionaries. I have always kept one handy, looking up words that I don’t know when I encounter them in reading or conversation. So what bothered me most about this event was not that I had made a mistake, but that I was making them without even knowing it and was likely to continue to do so. Because I could decode the meaning of the word from the text and could apply general rules of pronunciation, I assumed that I knew these words. It had never even occurred to me that I should look up these words.
Well, right after that class I was scheduled to work my shift in the Writing Center, and the professor I was working with that day is a stickler for correct grammar and pronunciation. I told him what had happened and about my worries that I would embarrass myself in the future. I don’t really know what kind of solution I expected from him other than the admonition that maybe I should look up everything, but his reply both surprised me and gave me comfort. He said, “When I hear a person mispronounce or misuse a word that is common to everyday usage, I think he is uneducated. When I hear a person mispronounce an unusual word but use it correctly, I know he is a reader. There is a great difference.”
Whew. Readers, we can relax now.
Now, just because you’ve never said these words aloud or heard anyone else pronounce them, doesn’t mean you don’t “say” them inside your head, and you can drift along for years, comfortable in your verbal ignorance. The big shock comes when you finally hear an educated person, your professor, for instance, use the word in a lecture, and you suddenly realize that you have always said the word incorrectly in your head. These mispronunciations usually consist of putting the emphasis on the wrong syllable, but occasionally you may have mangled a word almost beyond recognition. You are mortified and console yourself by thinking, “Thank goodness I never said the word aloud in public!” all the while wondering how many times you have humiliated yourself without being smart enough to even realize it. You discover that ignorance is not bliss.
Now, of course, you want examples. You want me to humiliate myself before you. Okay, okay, I will abandon my pride. The first instance of my pronunciative ignorance (I think I just coined a new word) began in my preteen days. My favorite reading material was a series of mystery novels, the Trixie Belden collection, and I think I had about eighteen of them. In these novels, Trixie’s brother Mart had an old jalopy. Now, in my head I pronounced this word JAlopy, with the emphasis on the first syllable. (As an aside, as I now think back, I am amazed at how many times the author felt the need to use this word throughout the course of these eighteen books. She must have liked how it sounded or enjoyed the appearance of it on the page.) When I finally heard someone say the word on television, I realized it was pronounced jaLOPy, with the emphasis on the second syllable. This discovery did not bother me too much because jalopy is not a word that a teenager just throws around, and even if I had decided to use it, I didn’t figure that any of my friends would have known what the word meant or how to pronounce it anyway.
Not so with this second illustration of my ignorance. I had seen the Latin term ad infinitum, meaning without limit or end, and, basing my pronunciation on the word "infinity," I assumed it was pronounced ad inFINitum. Wrong again. After hearing one of my professors use it in class, I discovered that it’s pronounced ad infinEYEtum. After class, I made straight for a dictionary, and sure enough, the professor was right and I was wrong. Imagine that.
I have never been a stranger to dictionaries. I have always kept one handy, looking up words that I don’t know when I encounter them in reading or conversation. So what bothered me most about this event was not that I had made a mistake, but that I was making them without even knowing it and was likely to continue to do so. Because I could decode the meaning of the word from the text and could apply general rules of pronunciation, I assumed that I knew these words. It had never even occurred to me that I should look up these words.
Well, right after that class I was scheduled to work my shift in the Writing Center, and the professor I was working with that day is a stickler for correct grammar and pronunciation. I told him what had happened and about my worries that I would embarrass myself in the future. I don’t really know what kind of solution I expected from him other than the admonition that maybe I should look up everything, but his reply both surprised me and gave me comfort. He said, “When I hear a person mispronounce or misuse a word that is common to everyday usage, I think he is uneducated. When I hear a person mispronounce an unusual word but use it correctly, I know he is a reader. There is a great difference.”
Whew. Readers, we can relax now.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)