Roil/Rile NY Times usage question

[Barnhart]

roil, v. def. 1 = disturb, unsettle (as waters)
        def. 2 = rile; vex
rile, v. def. 1 = vex
        def. 2 = roil; disturb, unsettle (of waters)

So in WBD, W11, RHWCD, AHD (no usage note).




Alan Baragona <abaragona at sprynet.com> on Tuesday, March 01, 2005 at 10:33
PM -0500 wrote:
>---------------------- Information from the mail header
>-----------------------
>Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>Poster:       Alan Baragona <abaragona at SPRYNET.COM>
>Subject:      Roil/Rile NY Times usage question
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>FW: NY Times usage questionThis, from a 35 year veteran of the New York =
>Times, supports the speculation that the Times considers "roil" and =
>"rile" lexically separate.
>
>Alan Baragona=20
>
>______________________________________________=20
>From:   Ayres, Drummond =20
>Sent:   Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:56 AM=20
>To:     Baragona, Alan=20
>Subject:        RE: NY Times usage question=20
>
>People get riled; waters get roiled --- more or less .... Most of the =
>time, at least when i was at the Times, Webster's 3rd was the Bible -- =
>and since Webster had moved on to another edition/s, the copies of the =
>3rd that were on the research desks were mighty fragile ... physically, =
>that is .... and over time, other dictionaries began to show up on the =
>desks also ... and the Times became a little more looseygoosey on such =
>matters ... but essentially the editors (there are a couple who are the =
>assigned specialists in such matters -- Alan Siegal in particular) =
>preferred the 3rd -- at least while i was there ...i've got a copy of =
>the 3rd at home in NYC ... will check it on the next NYC jaunt ... I =
>take it the search you folks did of the times past showed people getting =
>riled and waters getting roiled???