World Wide Words -- 11 Sep 10
Michael Quinion
wordseditor at WORLDWIDEWORDS.ORG
Fri Sep 10 16:20:52 UTC 2010
WORLD WIDE WORDS ISSUE 703 Saturday 11 September 2010
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Editor: Michael Quinion US advisory editor: Julane Marx
Website: http://www.worldwidewords.org ISSN 1470-1448
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A formatted version of this e-magazine is available
online at http://www.worldwidewords.org/nl/txuq.htm
This e-magazine is best viewed in a fixed-pitch font.
For a key to phonetic symbols, see http://wwwords.org?PRON
Contents
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Feedback, notes and comments.
2. Weird Words: Bedizened.
3. Wordface.
4. Q and A: Troop.
5. Sic!
A. Subscription information.
B. E-mail contact addresses.
C. Ways to support World Wide Words.
1. Feedback, notes and comments
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CHOPS Steve Haywood wrote: "The word chaps in the sense that you
highlight survives in that tasty Somerset morsel called the Bath
chap. This is the inside of a pig's mouth, which has me salivating
just to think about. With some freshly-baked wholemeal bread, a
dusting of white pepper and a dribble of white wine vinegar it's
food for the gods."
Dr Steve Britt-Hazard asked "Whence the use of 'choppy' referring
to a state of the sea?" This is actually from "chap", the same word
that is now used in the sense of cracking the skin, as in chapped
lips. It refers to the sea being broken up into cracks or clefts
through the opposing forces of wind and tide.
BUGS AND FLIES OK, so I'm better at etymology than entomology. A
number of readers told me that I had muddled my insect taxonomy. A
comprehensive critique came from Professor Denis J Brothers at the
University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa: "As a professional
entomologist, I enjoyed your bit about insect common names. As an
aid to my students over the last 35 years, I have informed them of
the rule you explain. Your piece also illustrates the hazards of
common names divorced from the relevant scientific names. In my
experience, a 'June bug' and 'tumblebug' are beetles and 'greenfly'
is a 'bug'. 'Blackfly' is more interesting, since it can be used
for a true fly and also for an aphid/'bug' - its usage would be
clarified if the rule were followed in this case - 'black fly' for
the true biting fly, and 'blackfly' for the aphid. I agree, though,
that such 'rules' cannot be enforced, but merely provide useful
guidelines." I've added a piece on "bedbug" to the website. It's at
http://wwwords.org?BDBG
2. Weird Words: Bedizened /bI'daIz(@)d/ or /bI'dIz(@)d/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To bedizen is to dress up in a gaudy way:
But every time one of the trapezoidal doors on Douglas
Stein's set blows open, it is to let in a bewigged and
bedizened buffoon very nearly her match.
[New York Times, 4 Jun. 2010.]
Despite this example, if we were true to the history of European
culture, we might argue that it is only women who can be bedizened.
It would be fruitless to do so, of course, because its users apply
the word as often to men as to women, as well as to houses, cars,
Christmas trees, theatrical sets and anything else that can be
accused of being decked out with finery to vulgar excess.
The female connections exist because the word is closely linked to
"distaff", which people now use most often for matters relating to
females. That's because spinning thread with the yard-long wooden
rod called a distaff was traditionally women's work. The "staff"
part of the word presents no difficulties, but few of us now know
that the "dis" beginning derives from an ancient Low German source
that meant a bunch of flax. (The implication that the distaff was
first used for spinning linen thread, not wool, is confirmed by the
archaeological evidence.)
Nearly 500 years ago, the verb "dizen" appeared, presumably from
the same source as "dis" (though nobody knows how), which meant to
dress a distaff for spinning. A century or so later it started to
refer to decking a person or a thing with finery. Within decades,
"be-" had been added to it to make the verb stronger. Ever since,
"bedizened" has implied that the bedecking has gone to excess.
3. Wordface
-------------------------------------------------------------------
WALKING DEAD A Bloomberg report this week says that Ireland is
suffering from ZOMBIE HOTELS, up to 300 of them. They have been
built in recent years with generous tax breaks and bank loans. The
recession is cutting business travel and many are now unviable;
they are accused of undercutting established hotels to generate
cash flow. The term is based on the rather older ZOMBIE BANK for
one that's virtually bankrupt but still staggering along.
PALINDRONE On Wednesday, the US dictionary publisher Merriam-
Webster announced its "Word of the Summer", the word that had been
searched for more often than any other in its online dictionary.
The one that came top by a big margin wasn't there, or indeed in
any other dictionary - it was Sarah Palin's confused blending of
"refute" and "repudiate" in a news show and a Twitter message back
in July: REFUDIATE. Merriam-Webster says they think searchers had
worked out what Sarah Palin was groping for, since "refute" and
"repudiate" were also looked up a lot.
GAME ON! I avidly read Victoria Coren's regular poker column in
the Guardian, not because I'm a player but because each one is a
surreal prose poem of magnificent opaqueness. This is from last
week's: "The flop came 2 5 6. A set! The big blind checked and the
original raiser bet 1000. I called, hoping the button might try a
'squeeze play' or that the original raiser would keep betting. But
the button folded and it was the big blind who check-raised up to
4000." Don't tell me what it means: that would spoil it.
4. Q and A: Troop
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Q. For at least as long as Western troops have been occupying
Afghanistan and Iraq, news reports have routinely misused the word
"troops" when talking about soldiers. Am I right in thinking that
"three troops were wounded" not only sounds daft but is incorrect
when what is meant is "three soldiers"? "Three troopers", yes, if
they were part of a regiment that is or was mounted. [Rosemary
Delnavine]
A. This usage has been bugging Americans in recent years, with a
lot of comment appearing on language-related sites.
The traditional position that you are likely to find in reference
books is that "troop" is a collective term for a group of people of
unspecified number (it's from medieval Latin "troppus", a flock,
and is the same word as "troupe" for a theatrical group). You can
refer to more than one troop in the sense of a set of such
collections ("the jamboree was attended by several dozen scout
troops") and use "troops" as a generalised collective term for the
forces ("the occasion was full of emotion and flag-waving as the
crowds lined the streets of Morpeth to give the troops a rousing
Northumbrian welcome.").
The usage of "troops" that you refer to is actually not that new.
For more than two centuries writers have used it for a countable
number of individuals, provided the number is large and not closely
specified. An early example:
This Attack is to be commanded by General Alvinzy; and
the Army which he will lead to it will consist of Fifty
Thousand Troops in the highest order and spirits, and
confident of success.
[The True Briton (London), 1 Feb. 1797.]
It's easy to find many similar instances throughout the nineteenth
century, so it's notable that the Oxford English Dictionary's entry
for "troop", written in the early years of the twentieth century,
doesn't include this plural countable use.
Despite this long history, many people continue to be unhappy about
it. The linguist John McWhorter objected to it on National Public
Radio in March 2007: "Calling 20,000 soldiers '20,000 troops'
depersonalizes the soldiers as individuals, and makes a massive
number of living, breathing individuals sound like some kind of
mass or substance, like water or Jell-O, or some kind of freight."
He noted in particular that "This usage of troops is only possible
in the plural. One cannot refer to a single soldier as a troop. ...
This means that mothers do not kiss their troop goodbye as he takes
off for Anbar Province. One will never encounter a troop learning
to use her prosthetic leg." It's becoming ever clearer that this
objection won't survive the pressure of current usage, at least by
the US media. "Troop" is increasingly being employed in reports for
an individual member of the armed forces:
The international force in Afghanistan says three
American troops have been killed by a roadside bomb in
the violence-wracked south. A NATO statement says two
troops died immediately after the blast Tuesday.
[AP News, 7 Jul. 2010.]
It came particularly to public notice in early November 2006, when
Senator John Kerry made an unfortunate joke and had to apologise:
"As a combat veteran, I want to make it clear to anyone in uniform
and to their loved ones: my poorly stated joke at a rally was not
about, and never intended to refer to any troop."
I'm told that singular "troop" for an individual has been recorded
in US military slang from World War Two. People who were in the
services during the 1950s and 1960s say it was then common in the
Army. The Oxford English Dictionary added the sense to the entry
for "troop" in 1993 (despite continuing to omit the countable
plural form), with one isolated case from 1832 ("As the wounded
'troop' was not much hurt, a sort of truce was proclaimed."), but
noted it was then chiefly military. That's no longer true.
"Troop" has developed into a singular and small plural count noun
for several reasons. There are now many more women in the various
US armed forces and this presents gender-related difficulties in
finding suitable terms for individuals ("serviceman" doesn't work
any longer). More significantly, it's been difficult to find an
inclusive term for a single member of the combined services -
soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and so on. "Serviceperson" or
"member of the armed forces" hardly trip off the tongue. The US
Department of Defense likes "servicemember" but that works only in
bureaucratese, not in news headlines or everyday speech. Though
"trooper" is available in theory, it's restricted in American usage
mainly to a member of the state police, and otherwise to a mounted
soldier in a cavalry regiment. "Warrior" has been popular, within
and outside the military, but has connotations that have rendered
it unpopular or unsuitable for some. "Combatant" is almost always
pejorative ("enemy combatant"). Not least, "troop" is usefully
short for fitting into headlines.
Despite wide unhappiness about it, there's no doubt that singular
"troop" has become a settled part of the language of the US media.
But I agree with John McWhorter that it will be some while, if
ever, before a member of the armed forces describes himself or
herself as a troop, not least because mutual pride and loyalties
within a service mean that specific terms such as soldier or airman
will continue to take precedence.
5. Sic!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
On 3 September, Victor Dewsbery came across a news item on the BBC
website about the police seizing a high-performance car from a
suspected drunken driver. The story noted: "Officers were driving
the car away - against force policy - when it crashed through two
gardens. One was injured." Poor garden.
On Friday 3 September, Rodney Kennett tells us, the Daily Mail had
this in a news item: "Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks, the leader of the
Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales and one of Britain's top
imams also joined the condemnation." Versatile clergyman ...
The restaurant business," complained Darren Zanon, "is hard enough
without this kind of press." A report in a CNN blog on 2 September
quoted Terry Goddard, Arizona's Attorney General: "What is hurting
us right now economically are statements ... about how Arizona has
become so violent, that we are a place of fear, and we have
beheadings in the dessert."
Harry Lake found a questionable sentence in a full-page advert in
the New Scientist of 28 August: "Calculus has made it possible to
build bridges that span miles of river, travel to the moon, and
predict patterns of population change." It had never occurred to
him that bridges were so versatile.
An AOL home-page link in its business section on 7 September, Jim
Tang noted, read "Most Dangerous Places to Drive" and was followed
by this blurb: "Residents of Washington D.C. are more likely to
have a collusion than any other U.S. city." That's unsurprising,
Congress is there, after all.
A. Subscription information
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To leave the list, change your subscription address or resubscribe,
please visit http://www.worldwidewords.org/maillist/index.htm
You can also maintain your subscription by e-mail. For a list of
commands, send this message to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org:
INFO WORLDWIDEWORDS
This e-magazine is also available as an RSS feed, whose source is
at http://www.worldwidewords.org/rss/newsletter.xml .
Back issues are at http://www.worldwidewords.org/backissues/ .
B. E-mail contact addresses
-------------------------------------------------------------------
* Comments on e-magazine mailings are always welcome. They should
be sent to me at wordseditor at worldwidewords.org . I do try to
respond, but pressures of time often prevent me from doing so.
* Items for "Sic!" should go to wordsclangers at worldwidewords.org .
Submissions will not usually be acknowledged.
* Questions intended to be answered in the Q and A section should
be addressed to wordsquestions at worldwidewords.org (please don't
use this address to respond to published answers to questions -
e-mail the comment address instead).
* Problems with subscriptions that cannot be handled by the list
server should be addressed to wordssubs at worldwidewords.org . To
allow me more time for researching material, please don't e-mail
me asking for simple subscription changes you can do yourself.
C. Ways to support World Wide Words
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Wide Words e-magazine and website are free, but if you
would like to help with their costs, there are several ways to do
so. Visit http://www.worldwidewords.org/support.htm for details.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
World Wide Words is copyright (c) Michael Quinion 2010. All rights
reserved. The Words website is at http://www.worldwidewords.org .
-------------------------------------------------------------------
You may reproduce brief extracts from this e-magazine in mailing
lists, newsletters or newsgroups online, provided that you include
the copyright notice given above. Reproduction of substantial parts
of items in printed publications or websites needs permission from
the editor beforehand (wordseditor at worldwidewords.org).
-------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the WorldWideWords
mailing list