status quo = 'situation'

[Jonathan Lighter]

I think the issue is what "means" means.

The speaker chose to say "status quo" when the obvious choice for most of us
(i.e., me) should have been "situation" or "long-term situation," etc.

On the basis of the evidence, that's what he "meant."

While it may be true that the kind of sitch he's talking about could also be
described as a "stalemate," "status quo" would not *mean* "stalemate" in a
dictionary sense except in
statements such as:

1. *Nobody's winning! It's a status quo!

Now there certainly are statements such as the following, in which "status
quo" *refers* to a stalemate:

2. "What's been happening on the Western Front the past four years?"
"Nothing much. Status quo."

In 2, "status quo" means 'an existing situation that hasn't changed,' which,
in this context, implies an actual stalemate.Status quo," under certain
circumstances, can allude to a stalemate, but I don't believe it ever
*means* "stalemate," because I don't believe that *anyone* who would say 2
would also say 1.

Unless they were very weird. So "status quo" doesn't "mean" stalemate.

JL


On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Wilson Gray <hwgray at gmail.com> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Wilson Gray <hwgray at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: status quo = 'situation'
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To quote Jersey Shores' The Situation:
>
> "This is a situation."
>
> --
> -Wilson
> -----
> All say, "How hard it is that we have to die!"---a strange complaint
> to come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
> -Mark Twain
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> > Sender: Â  Â  Â  American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster: Â  Â  Â  Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at GMAIL.COM>
> > Subject: Â  Â  Â Re: status quo = 'situation'
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Why is it weird, if the status quo is a stalemate, and expected (by the
> > analyst) to stay that way?
> >
> > DanG
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Jonathan Lighter
> > <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> >> -----------------------
> >> Sender: Â  Â  Â  American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> >> Poster: Â  Â  Â  Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> >> Subject: Â  Â  Â Re: status quo = 'situation'
> >>
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> If it means "stalemate," it's even weirder.
> >>
> >> Ockham's Razor says it probably doesn't - if you can trust a talking
> razor.
> >>
> >> JL
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> >> > -----------------------
> >> > Sender: Â  Â  Â  American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> >> > Poster: Â  Â  Â  Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at GMAIL.COM>
> >> > Subject: Â  Â  Â Re: status quo = 'situation'
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> > How about a contrast to either side winning?
> >> > DanG
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Jonathan Lighter
> >> > <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> >> > > -----------------------
> >> > > Sender: Â  Â  Â  American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> >> > > Poster: Â  Â  Â  Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> >> > > Subject: Â  Â  Â status quo = 'situation'
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >
> >> > > Or maybe 'long-term situation.' Â Truly, who can say?:
>  >> > >
> >> > > 2011 Reuters
> >> > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110318/bs_nm/us_markets_oil(March
> >> > > 18): "We may be facing the possibility of an entrenched status quo
> >> > between
> >> > > pro and anti Gaddafi groups," said Harry Tchilinguirian, analyst at
> BNP
> >> > > Paribas.
> >> > >
> >> > > Though OED defines "status quo" as "the existing state of affairs,"
> it
> >> > > usually implies a contrast of that state with a different one.
> >> > > In the ex. above, there's no contrast that I can see.
> >> > >
> >> > > JL
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
> >> > truth."
> >> > >
> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
> truth."
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >>
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>



-- 
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

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