"mediocre"
Laurence Horn
laurence.horn at YALE.EDU
Thu Sep 25 15:32:46 UTC 2008
I don't think this is worth pursuing much further on-list, but just
to clarify what I said earlier and to distinguish it from what Ron
said I said, which makes me sound stupider than I think I am:
1) In claiming that there's no scale with "ordinary" as the
strongest/highest value I was talking about lexical
semantics/pragmatics more generally, not restricting myself to the
two values "ordinary" and "mediocre". Speakers who say things like
"he's not just ordinary, but quite good", "Cassel wasn't even
mediocre in that game, let alone good", etc. are clearly invoking a
scale on which "good" outranks "ordinary" and "mediocre". And,
obviously, "average" implies the existence of a scale with higher and
lower values. Ron and I are probably using "scale" in different
senses (or different contexts) here, so this is no doubt a
disagreement without a difference.
2) In claiming that 'Larry prefers to define ["mediocre"] exclusively
as "ordinary"', Ron is misrepresenting what I actually said, in one
of the postings from yesterday that he reproduces below, viz.
=============
[RB:]
>My understanding of "mediocre" is something like 'not up to
>average'. This is more or less confirmed by the American Heritage
>definition: "ADJECTIVE: Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary."
[LH:]
Note that "moderate...in quality" and "ordinary" are not
interchangeable with "inferior in quality" or "not up to average".
There's a range of application here.
==============
I was assuming (for at least expository purposes) the AHD definition
as given (whence my invoking "a range of application"), and also
noting the distinction between the two sets of paraphrases it (and
Ron) provides, i.e. (i) "moderate...in quality" and "ordinary" on the
one hand and (ii) "inferior in quality" and "not up to average" on
the other. This cannot be reduced to the claim that I define
"mediocre" exclusively as "ordinary". I take (i) as a stronger (more
positive) value than (ii) on the scale that goes up to (and beyond)
"good".
But at this point I think we're either going in circles or going
right past each other, and we all have other tangents to pursue, so
I'll leave Kent Mercker in peace to work on his no doubt excellent
vodka-to-urine converter, which is where all this somehow began.
LH
At 11:04 AM -0400 9/25/08, RonButters at AOL.COM wrote:
>I said that "mediocre" implies a scale with moderate/ordinary at the top
>because that is exactly what the American Heritage definition says:
>"moderate to
>inferior." NOAD is even clearer: " of only moderate quality; not very good: a
>mediocre actor."
>
>It begins to seem that this whole discussion is merely about what "mediocre"
>means. Larry prefers to define it exclusively as "ordinary," ignoring the part
>of the definition that strongly indicates that something that is evaluated as
>"mediocre" is AT BEST "moderate to inferior" and "not very good"--not merely
>in the middle of the scale.
>
>If Larry meant merely "ordinary" why didn't he say that instead of using a
>word that--as the dictionaries strongly indicate--readily conveys the sense of
>"inferior" and "not very good."
>
>In a message dated 9/24/08 8:15:44 PM, laurence.horn at yale.edu writes:
>
>
>> At 12:07 AM +0000 9/25/08, ronbutters at aol.com wrote:
>> >Whether Larry is alone or not, it seems to me that the nasty blogs,
>> >etc., of generally rabid fans are not very good company. But the
>> >fact that Larry's compadres use "mediocre" as a term of disparagment
>> >certainly supports my contention that calling a veteran player
>> >"mediocre" strongly suggests that he is sub-par. If "ordinary" is
>> >the top of the scale, then what else can "mediocre" be but not so
>> >hot?
>>
>> Why would anyone see "ordinary" as the top of any scale? There are a
>> lot of good pitchers, even in the restricted sense of 'better than an
>> average major league pitcher'. Outside of Lake Wobegon, where all
>> the pitchers are above average, there will be some better than
>> average, some worse than average, and some ordinary/mediocre ones in
> > between. It takes skill to assemble a collection of pitchers in the
>> second (worse than average) category, but the Mets' relief staff this
>> year has striven nobly to approach that goal.
>>
>> LH
>>
>> >
>> >Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
>> >
>> >Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:09:27
>> >To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> >Subject: Re: [ADS-L] "long-term mediocre major-league pitchers"
>> >
>> >
>> >At 12:52 PM -0400 9/24/08, ronbutters at aol.com wrote:
>> >>My understanding of "mediocre" is something like 'not up to
>> >>average'. This is more or less confirmed by the American Heritage
>> >>definition: "ADJECTIVE: Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary."
>> >
>> >Note that "moderate...in quality" and "ordinary" are not
> > >interchangeable with "inferior in quality" or "not up to average".
>> >There's a range of application here.
>> >
>> >>I'd say that "18 years, 9 different teams, lifetime 74-67, ERA 4.16"
>> >>is extradordinary even when compared to most other major league
>> >>baseball players, many of whom last less than one season. So this
>> >>particular player, in my book, does not qualify as "mediocre" or
>> >>even particularly ordinary.
>> >
>> >Just to see if I was being idiosyncratic or unfair, I tried googling
>> >"Kent Mercker" + mediocre. From the first page of hits:
>> >
>> >The problem is that as mediocre as Mercker has aspired to be for the
>> >last couple of years,...
>> >[from a BaseballProspectus web analysis for the 1999 Red Sox]
>> >
>> >Kent Mercker, mediocre reliever and professional tattletale...
>> >[from a blog on the 2004 Cubs]
>> >
>> >I guess in that sense, Mercker is an upgrade; but I'd just as well
>> >have Reyes or Thompson or Tavarez pitch in these situations that call
>> >for leftys rather than adding a mediocre left-hander. [from a blog on
>> >the 2005 Orioles]
>> >
>> >His [K.M.'s] fantasy value gets a boost from a few extra saves, but
> > >his numbers will otherwise be pretty mediocre.
>> >[from a fantasy blog on the 2006 Cincinnati Reds]
>> >
>> >Another postings cite his "mediocre" work, talents, or status as a
>> >member of the Indians, Red Sox, etc.
>> >
>> >At least if my judgment is off, I'm not alone!
>> >
>> >LH
>> >
>> >>I would be more inclined to agree with Larry that "mediocre
>> >>major-league pitcher" could apply to one of those pitchers who has
>> >>not been in the majors for "longtime." Even then, though, it makes a
>> >>difference whether or not one takes "major-league" as a restrictive
>> >>or nonrestrictive modifier. I took Larry's phrase to mean 'mediocre
>> >>pitcher who spent a long time in the majors' and not 'pitcher who
>> >>was mediocre by big-league standards'. Pitchers who make it to the
>> >>big leagues for any oength of time at all are pretty likely to be
>> >>something better than "ordinary" or "mediocre" when compared to all
>> >>professional pitchers.
>> >>
>> >>As for how to tell who is a "long-time mediocre Ivy league
>> >>professor," Larry is totally wrong that there are not fairly
>> >>reliable stats. They are called "c.v.'s." And they give one a pretty
>> >>good idea of which professors are ''mediocre players who have
>> >>nonetheless spent a long time in the majors." These are the folks
>> >>who are not-so-politely referred to by their col leagues as "dead
>> >>wood" and "departmental mistakes." Unlike professional baseball,
>> > >universities have something called "tenure."
>> >>
>> >>At 1:22 PM +0000 9/24/08,
>> >><mailto:ronbutters at aol.com>ronbutters at aol.com wrote:
>> >>>"longtime mediocre major-league pitcher" is an oxymoron
>> >>>(unlike >"longtime mediocre Ivy-league professor"--please note that
>> >>>I am NOT >suggesting that Prof. Horn is anything but brilliant)
>> >>
>> >>No more of an oxymoron than "NBA small forward", referring to
>> >>basketball players ranging from 6'4" to 6'10" or so. "Mediocre",
>> >>like "long", "small", etc. etc., is a relative scalar adjective
>> >>whose extension depends on the comparison class. Are you saying it's
>> >>oxymoron to refer to the Kansas City Royals as "a bad baseball team"
>> >>because if they were in a different league (e.g. the Atlantic Coast
> > >>Conference) rather than in the American League they might go
>> >>undefeated? Mercker, by most definitions, has been a
>> >>middle-of-the-pack pitcher, and hence mediocre qua major-league
>> >>pitcher, while (in part because of being a southpaw) hanging around
>> >>forever. 18 years, 9 different teams, lifetime 74-67, ERA 4.16--in
>> >>my book, that makes him a mediocre journeyman--nothing personal,
>> >>although for all I know he'll be superb at vodka conversion. And
>> >>yes, there are indeed longtime mediocre Ivy league professors, even
>> >>at Yale, whether or not that includes present company. Luckily, it's
>> >>harder to confirm this by looking a t the career stat sheet.
>> >>
>> >>LH
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu>
>> >>To: ronbutters at aol.com; ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>> >>Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 9:50 am
>> >>Subject: Re: notable quotable on post-retirement plans
>> >>
>> >>At 1:22 PM +0000 9/24/08,
>> >><mailto:ronbutters at aol.com>ronbutters at aol.com wrote:
>> >>>"longtime mediocre major-league pitcher" is an oxymoron
>> >>>(unlike >"longtime mediocre Ivy-league professor"--please note that
>> >>>I am NOT >suggesting that Prof. Horn is anything but brilliant)
>> >>
>> >>No more of an oxymoron than "NBA small forward", referring to
>> >>basketball players ranging from 6'4" to 6'10" or so. "Mediocre",
>> >>like "long", "small", etc. etc., is a relative scalar adjective
>> >>whose extension depends on the comparison class. Are you saying it's
>> >>oxymoron to refer to the Kansas City Royals as "a bad baseball team"
>> >>because if they were in a different league (e.g. the Atlantic Coast
>> >>Conference) rather than in the American League they might go
>> >>undefeated? Mercker, by most definitions, has been a
>> >>middle-of-the-pack pitcher, and hence mediocre qua major-league
>> >>pitcher, while (in part because of being a southpaw) hanging around
> > >>forever. 18 years, 9 different teams, lifetime 74-67, ERA 4.16--in
>> >>my book, that makes him a mediocre journeyman--no thing personal,
>> >>although for all I know he'll be superb at vodka conversion. And
>> >>yes, there are indeed longtime mediocre Ivy league professors, even
>> >>at Yale, whether or not that includes present company. Luckily, it's
>> >>harder to confirm this by looking at the career stat sheet.
>> >>
>> >>LH
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>------Original Message------
>> >>>From: Laurence Horn
>> >>>Sender: ADS-L
>> >>>To: ADS-L
>> >>>ReplyTo: ADS-L
>> >>>Sent: Sep 24, 2008 12:30 AM
>> >>>Subject: [ADS-L] notable quotable on post-retirement plans
>> >>>
>> >>>I don't know if he invented the line, but longtime mediocre
>> >>>major-league pitcher Kent Mercker has been widely quoted on the web
>> >>>and now TV for his elegant response last week as to where he thought
>> >>>his career would be heading now: "I'm starting my new
>> >>>profession--turning vodka into urine."
>> >>>
>> >>>LH
>> >>>
>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>The American Dialect Society -
>> >>><http://www.americandialect.org>http://www.americandialect.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>> >>>
>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>The American Dialect Society -
>> >>><http://www.americandialect.org>http://www.americandialect.org
>> >>
>> >
>> >------------------------------------------------------------
>> >The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >
>> >------------------------------------------------------------
>> >The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>**************
>Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial
>challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and
>calculators.
> (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l
mailing list