gentile = ethnonymic (was: Heard on The Judges: crack)

[Mark Mandel]

(_Ben and Me_?)

BEN:
>  >>  Speaking of adj > n confusion, here's a snippet from Safire's latest
>  >>  "On Language" column:
>  >>
>  >>  ---
>  >>  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13wwln-safire-t.html
>  >>  Most people take the noun _perfect_ to mean "flawless, faultless,
>  >>  impeccable," as in the King James translation of God's description of
>  >>  Job as "a perfect and an upright man."

MARK:
>  >Oh sh.t, Safire at least knows better than THAT!

BEN:
>  In the same column, Safire also writes "The primary meaning of the
>  noun, pronounced PERfect, is "complete, whole, finished," and the
>  verb taking that action, pronounced perFECT, means "to complete, make
>  whole, finish".
>
>  Maybe two nouns make an adjective?

Maybe he's losing it? Maybe interns are writing the column? (But still...)

Ah. See the KJV quote: "a perfect and an upright man". Whereof OED saith:

perfect, adj., n., and adv.
    B. n.
    2. A perfect person.

And yet, the Good Book saith further and directly under B2:
   Chiefly with the and pl. concord: such people as a class; spec. the
righteous or very holy.
Relevant cite, same period as KJV:
   1638 R. BRATHWAIT Psalmes of David 70 See and observe the Perfects
close, the righteous man attend.
But it gives no later use of this sense in the singular.

Also possibly relevant: In modern English we seldom if ever use
  [[DET ADJ] CONJ [DET ADJ] N]
which leaves a parsing of the string as
  [DET N] CONJ [DET ADJ N]
like
  "a gentleman and an exemplary scholar"

But a look at Safire's column shows clearly that he's talking about
the adjective in today's usage.

I would've expected him to know better. Maybe he's losing it? Maybe
interns are writing the column? Which is where we came in.

m a m

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org