« Dump Trump and Pillory Hillary - 26sep16 (updated 28sep16) | Main | Sandbox - 1oct16 »

28 September 2016



Hugo Lindgren tweeted:

Is there a word in the English language that more reliably means its opposite than ‘amicable’?

Twitter responses included: “moot,” “humbled,” “nice,” “my friend,” “nonplussed,” “cordial,” “priceless,” “tolerance,” “literally,” “spry,” “sincerely,” “honest,” “pal,” “sure,” and “”Fine” particularly when given as a one word answer.”

Tyler Cowen's favorite was “spry.” Is there a word for such words? Are there other examples?


Account Deleted

Oh, good Lord - you forgot 'tolerant'.
The left pride themselves as tolerant whereas I, as a conservative, am intolerant.
Tolerant of what? And intolerant of what?
Never mind, I'm better than you because I'm tolerant and you're intolerant.
I had to laugh at that college in Oregon that proposes to offer a major in 'social justice'. The spokes-idiot admitted they didn't even know what social justice was.
The definition was - get ready for it: "A work in progress".

George Rebane

ScottO 545pm - Indeed I did, and as confessed,"Today’s list of semantically castrated words is almost endless." Added contributions are most welcome.

Bill Tozer

What shall I call you? Glad you asked.

Favorite quote:

#UMPronounChallenge You shall now refer to me as "The Exalted Reverend Doctor Architect," & everyone else shall refer to themselves as Mary.

Works for me.

Bill Tozer

Been thinking. Once the snowflakes leave the safe places of higher education and Shangri La, they enter the real world......unless they land a job of low expectations for the gobberment. So, the Pro-noun police person applies for a job in the cruel unimformed hostile private sector. During the interview the employer asks what extra curricular actives was the applicant involved in at college. The young snowflake replies "I was the Chairperson of the Student Body Pronoun Committee."

"You were the chairman of a student body committee?" asks the employer not familiar with what pronoun group functions entail.

"Chairperson! Chairperson of the Pronoun Committe" snaps back the interviewee

Don't call us, we will call you. Thank you for your time. Next. .

George Rebane

IMHO one of the most widespread and therefore egregious rapes of the King's English is the misuse of the personal pronoun in the predicate of a sentence. It appears that almost no one knows where and how to correctly use 'I' and 'me', especially in compound direct objects. There 'me' is now banished to the Mongolian hinterlands, and people - including teachers and professors - attempt to sound educated with garbles such as, 'Then he asked Bob and I to accompany him.'

The rule is simple - 'I' in the subject (He and I went ...), and 'me' in the predicate (... gave it to him and me.) - and its recall is even simpler, just drop one of the pronouns and see if the sentence still sounds right. Nobody would accept 'Then he asked I to accompany him.'

Oh were that such atrocities be the country's most serious expression of national dumbth.

Bill Tozer

Beyond proper grammar construction, the gist of Dr. Rebane's post is the dilution of the meaning of particular words and, by extension, lumping together distinct differences in the words as synonyms. Hero was a good example. A child may look at his drunken deadbeat Dad as a hero, but hardly anyone else would. Sobering up and swearing off the bottle is not an act of heroism, but one would think it is akin to doing an heroic act listening to psychobabble.

My pet peeve lately is the word violence. Non threatening words are called violence in and off themselves. Remember when practically anyone/everyone was labeled prejudice if one did not hire or agree with someone who was different than them? Now it's called racist. As I have pointed out, illegal immigrants are not a race, neither are Romans or Mexicans. Calling some long hair smelly freaky dude an "old hippy" is not violence or racist. It may be bigoted or prejudice, but not violence.

It took a review court, lawyers, and a letter from the head of the NAACP to reinstate an expelled U of Penn student to prove both historically and in current lingo that the student did not yell a racial epithet at a group of black co-eds. Seems the co-eds got extremely drunk and boisterous outside the student's dorm window at 3 am on a school night, thus the student yelled out "Shut up!, you water buffalos" (or rhinos?) The student was white. The drunk partiers were fat drunk black female students. No fat shaming (elephants/pigs/hippos) or racial slurs, yet he was immediately expelled from Penn for hurling racial epithets. He was reinstated the following school year. That was years ago and it has not gotten better, only worse. Words do have meanings, but they knew what he really meant, lol. It's this attachment of motives and other nuferious deeds to words that gets me. Taking away a smile on your face or "stealing your peace of mind" is not burglary.

Granted, words do change their meaning over time. The King James Version of the Bible was written in 1611, about 400 years ago. The word "conduct" then now means conversation. "Wholesome conversation" is a watered down version of "wholesome conduct", IMHO. Today, conduct and conversation are not synonyms. Apprehend of 400 years ago is today's comprehend. Again, watered down. Apprehending something means you really got it. Comprehend something means you understand it. World of difference to both the listener and speaker.

I reckon they had to come up with the term "micro-aggression" because anybody with two brain cells left could not defend encountering a disapproving face or eyes glancing away as aggression...Ah, screw then laughing hyenas.


Proper use of the personal pronoun is important if one is trying to woo an English teacher. Other situations, not so much.

The comments to this entry are closed.