ept

Mon Mar 22 11:28:46 UTC 2010

>From Wilson (with my response below).

On Mar 22 2010, Wilson Gray wrote:

> I was thinking of _apt_ vs. _inept_ from the historical point of view.
> So, _ept_ as the positive of _inept_ sounded at first glance, so to
> speak, ridiculous and stupid. Now, my feeling is that it could be
> reasonably argued that _apt_ and _inept_, though historically connected,
> are totally distinct words. Or not.
>
>Cf., e.g.
>
>His response was _apt_ [precisely what needed to be said]
>
>vs.
>
>His response was _inept_ [?*not*? precisely what needed to be said]
>
>His response was _inept_ [precisely ?*not*? what needed to be said]
>
>IMO, they *still* don't quite feel like positive vs. negative.
>
>But, to resurrect a Larry-ism, YMMV.
>
>-Wilson

They don't _feel_ like formal antonyms to me either, for pretty much the
reasons you give below - but it's probably still just about plausible that
historically they are, especially if there was a raising influence from
preceding /n/ in _inapt > inept_. This would be much more plausible if the
/n/ were following, but other segments are known to have an influence on
their neighbours whether they follow or precede (/r/ (though its
phonological influence varies by language), /m/ (which backs back vowels,
or keeps them back if they would otherwise front in a dialect), /l/ (same
effect)). Does anyone know if the same can hold for /n/?

Damien

>On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Damien Hall <djh514 at york.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> -----------------------
>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> Poster:       Damien Hall <djh514 at YORK.AC.UK>
>> Subject:      Fwd: Re: ept
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> From Wilson.
>>
>> It didn't occur to me when first writing this that phonological
>> change=20 could actually mean that _inept_ was the negative form of
>> _apt_ - which is= =20 plausible, isn't it? Is there any actual proof? In
>> which case, the=20 non-occurrence of _ept_ is explained.
>>
>> The expression _apt to_ is surely also more widespread than the (social
>> and= =20 geographical) locale where Wilson grew up. I've heard it in
>> American and=20 related (Bahamian) Englishes, and recently, and I'm not
>> even from there!
>>
>> Damien
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Wilson Gray <hwgray at gmail.com>
>> Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 15:20:55 -0400
>> Subject: Re: ept
>> To: djh514 at york.ac.uk
>>
>> I once heard "socially ept" used seriously on the tube. Thinking, Surely,
>> that's a hapax, I didn't pay any further attention to it.
>>
>> I also had the strangest feeling that "socially apt" would also be
>> ridculous, probably because I tend not to perceive _apt_ as the positive
>> of _inept__. After some pondering, I was ultimately able to recall that,
>> when = I was a child in Texas, _apt to_ meant "likely to," "liable to,"
>> "going to have to" in intra-familial threats:
>>
>> "If y'all don't stop all that rippin' 'n' runnin', I'm _ap'_ to get me a
>> keen little switch an' give y'all a whippin.'"
>>
>> (Even back in the '30's behind the Cotton Curtain, the pronunciations,
>> "git=
>> "
>> and "whup(pin')," were regarded as "country" or d=E9class=E9 by the black
>> bourgeoisie, in East Texas, at least. The /E/ in "get" tended toward /&/,
>> "gat," like the /E/ used by white people who pronounce "ten" almost as
>> "tan," so that a double-take is needed by those of us who use "tin" for
>> "ten.")
>>
>> -Wilson
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 8:06 AM, Damien Hall <djh514 at york.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> > -----------------------
>> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> > Poster:       Damien Hall <djh514 at YORK.AC.UK>
>> > Subject:      ept
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
>> ------
>> >
>> > Just heard the author Val McDermid, on the BBC ethical-debate show 'The
>> B=
>> ig
>> > Questions' (21 March 2010), say something like the following:
>> >
>> > '[my children are] well-adjusted and socially ept'
>> >
>> > OED only lists _ept_ as 'a deliberate antonym of "inept": adroit,
>> > appropriate, effective; hence _eptitude_, _eptly_ adv.', and the
>> quotatio=
>> ns
>> > back that up, all seeming to use it ironically. The word isn't in the
>> > online version of MW. From her tone, McDermid wasn't being ironic -
>> > there was no change of pitch or pause to call attention to the word -
>> > and
>> no-on=
>> e
>> > picked it up, though, granted, on that show you wouldn't expect them to
>> > (they were debating IVF at the time).
>> >
>> > MDermid was brought up in the late '50s and early '60s in Kirkcaldy,
>> Fife=
>> ,
>> > Scotland; I don't know whether that's relevant to the use of the form,
>> bu=
>> t
>> > others here might. Has anyone else heard it non-ironically?
>> >
>> > Damien
>> >
>> > --
>> > Damien Hall
>> >
>> > University of York
>> > Department of Language and Linguistic Science
>> > Heslington
>> > YORK
>> > YO10 5DD
>> > UK
>> >
>> > Tel. (office) +44 (0)1904 432665
>> >     (mobile) +44 (0)771 853 5634
>> > Fax  +44 (0)1904 432673
>> >
>> > http://www.york.ac.uk/res/aiseb
>> >
>> > http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/people/pages/hall.htm
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >
>>
>>
>> Wilson
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
>
>Wilson
>

--
Damien Hall

University of York
Department of Language and Linguistic Science
Heslington
YORK
YO10 5DD
UK

Tel. (office) +44 (0)1904 432665
     (mobile) +44 (0)771 853 5634
Fax  +44 (0)1904 432673

http://www.york.ac.uk/res/aiseb

http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/people/pages/hall.htm

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