anachronism?

[RonButters at AOL.COM]

Sorry, that was supposed to say "too weird"; thanks for the input, Pat.

In a message dated 3/13/2000 11:42:03 AM, P2052 at AOL.COM writes:

<< Is the spelling ot to correct?  If so, then weird is being used as a noun.
According to  two sources,  The Merriam-Webster New Book of Word Histories
and the Arcade Dictionary of Word Origins, in Old English, the word was used
a noun, meaning, "fate" or "destiny."  However, "This is getting to weird
[fate, destiny]," doesn't make a whole lot of sense in this context.

If  to is a misspelling of too, and weird is being used as an adjective,
then,  both semantically and structurally, it is acceptable (at least in the
sense of "odd" or "uncanny").  Both of the above sources also claim that the
first adjectival use of weird was in "weird sisters," the three Fates
portrayed as witches in  Macbeth.  In this context, according to the Arcade,
the meaning is, "having the power to control fate."   The Merriam-Webster
further describes an adjectival sense of "magical," "odd,"  or "fantastic"
(first used in the 18th century), and the Arcade adds that in the early 19th
century, the word assumed the definition, "uncanny."
                                                PAT >>