[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: First and final word.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, rhys daily wrote:
> however, as much strength, if not more, is given to the idiomatic
> definition of a word.
Nice use of the passive voice, there. *Who* gives it this strength? And
why should that person's opinion matter?
> words can change.
Oh, for sure, but some changes reflect a misunderstanding of what a word
was supposed to mean in the first place, and I tend to resist that. For
example, I would never use words like "sodomite" and "onanistic" except in
a deliberately ironic sense -- keeping the words in quote marks, as it
were -- because these words are based on misunderstandings about the
biblical stories of Sodom (the sin of which was *not* homosexuality) and
Onan (whose sin was *not* masturbation). Likewise, the idea that death is
all it takes to make something "tragic" is based on a misunderstanding of
"tragedy". Not all tragedies end in death and destruction. There is
something more complicated at work. And I am not convinced that many of
the things the popular media deems "tragic" fit the bill, whether we're
talking about a flood, the death of Princess Diana, or, well, this.
> > This is the looser, generalized, dumbed-down definition of the word,
> > yes.
>
> so i'm dumb.
Or loose, or general. Take your pick. :)
> i'm with the common person on the street: tragic is something sad that
> happens. something that defies belief.
Sorry, even though I make as much use of the streets as anyone else, "the
common person" doesn't hold much sway with me. It's not like he or she
hasn't been wrong before.
--- Peter T. Chattaway --------------------------- peter at chattaway_com ---
"I detected one misprint, but to torture you I will not tell you where."
Winston Churchill to T.E. Lawrence, re Seven Pillars of Wisdom
---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/MediaNation/OtR/
Follow-Ups:
References: