[Lexicog] archaic entries
dr_john_roberts at SIL.ORG
Fri Feb 10 23:09:08 UTC 2006
Andrew Dunbar suggested:
It might be worth asking how various people differentiate "archaic" from
"obsolete" while we're at it.
A quick check of web definitions gives the basic definition of "obsolete"
as: no longer in use, e.g.
disused: no longer in use; "obsolete words"
A definition of "archaic" is: old-fashioned or no longer used
The meaning of an archaic word is usually still understandable and is
recognised by speakers as an "old word" no longer in current usage. But the
meaning of an obsolete word is typically not known to contemporary speakers
of the language.
There are lists of archaic and obsolete words on the internet to illustrate
Some English archaic words are: thou art, betwixt, costermonger, doth, kine
(cattle), thither, zounds (something Superman might say). For all of these
words I know their meaning but I recognise they are old words from a bygone
Some English obsolete words are: crine (to shrink), gowl (to weep), malison
(a curse - opposite of benison "a blessing"), sloom (to sleep soundly),
wedfellow (spouse). Whereas I never knew any of these words until I saw them
on the obsolete list.
So a word is classified as "archaic" or "obsolete" based on usage. I don't
see how a dictionary maker could banish a word from the language by
classifying it as obsolete. But there is probably a grey area between
whether a word is archaic or obsolete. For example, there are some words on
the archaic list that I do not know such as bobbish (brisk, well), drab
(prostitute), whitlow (sore on thumb or finger). So for me these words are
For a language that is not written down I guess the obsolete words are gone
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
More information about the Lexicography