Mark A. Mandel Mark_Mandel at DRAGONSYS.COM
Wed Jan 10 18:00:55 UTC 2001

David Barnhart <ADS-L at HIGHLANDS.COM> writes:

The problem of this year's b.s.n. terms is troubling from one point of
view.  I simply did not do as much research as I should have.


unconceded  OED 1674

A look at "Making of America" shows:

To insist that the union was such as to destroy the separate existence
and unconceded rights of the constituent parts of the body,
   The General Assembly of 1835, The Princeton Review, July 1835, p 465

Clearly, this is more than consulting any individual.  It is a matter
of the principals doing their homework.  My undertaking was incomplete
to say the least.  Please accept my apologies for my failings in this

The 1835 cite is irrelevant to the sense in question. It is
     un + (concede + ed)
i.e., a negation of the past participle "conceded", rather than
     (un + concede) + ed
the past participle of the negation of "concede". IOW, it is not derived
from "unconcede", which is the lemma that people were discussing.

I can't tell about the 1674 OED cite without looking, and my OED's at home
whereas I'm at work, but I regard it as suspect for the same reason until
examined in context.

So, Dave, you've got less to apologize about than you think you do!

-- Mark A. Mandel

More information about the Ads-l mailing list