"Complicate" = "elucidate the complexity of"

[Jonathan Lighter]

"Problematize" may sound too negative for today's word fetishist. Remember:
there no problems, only opportunities!

But "complicate" sounds like a fantastically fun acrostic or something. It's
not a downer!

JL



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> Subject:      Re: "Complicate" = "elucidate the complexity of"
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> At 3/22/2011 10:19 PM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> >I've seen this many, many times.
>
> I hadn't -- but perhaps I'm reading stuff from the stone age (viz. LH
> below).  20th century.
>
> >I believe the intended meaning is not to "elucidate the complexity of" but
> >rather to "make more interesting or significant by developing complexities
> >that may be said to follow from the text."
>
> I knew that -- but my def is shorter, and I wanted to be ... is it
> "ironic", Jon? by using a verb that suggested the opposite of
> "complicate".  :-)
>
>
> >The difference, if there is one, is that your interpretation suggests that
> >the complexities are plainly and indisputably there. Mine implies that
> they
> >are developed imaginatively  by the relentless, self-important critic.
> >
> >For example: one cannot easily "complicate" Das Kapital because
> >it's complicated already.  But one could easily "complicate" an episode of
> >The Fintstones by pointing out, with extensive support from theory, the
> deep
> >sexism, racism, elitism, homophobia (or homoeroticism),
> >anti-intellectualism, and, above all, self-negating contradictions
> suggested
> >by following the deductive and inductive implications of the characters,
> >plot, dialogue, milieu, etc., to their penultimate logical conclusions.
> >
> >Now that's what *I* call "complicating.
> >
> >JL
>
> And LH wrote:
> >Isn't this what used to be called (in the good old days)
> >"problematizing" an issue rather than complicating it?
>
> I think so.  The problematized (or is it complicatized?) jargon evolves.
>
> Joel
>
>
>
>
> >On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
> >
> > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > > -----------------------
> > > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > > Poster:       "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> > > Subject:      "Complicate" = "elucidate the complexity of"
> > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >  From an announcement of a forthcoming Newberry Library
> > > Eighteenth-Century Seminar presentation by PROFESSOR DENA GOODMAN:
> > >
> > > Professor Goodman seeks to complicate the picture of
> > > nineteenth-century reactionary aristocrats and modern republicans by
> > > bringing an eighteenth-century perspective to bear on French
> > > revolutionary and post-revolutionary culture and society.
> > >
> > > I think I'll skip this -- historical life is complicated enough as it
> is.
> > >
> > > Joel
> > >
>  > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
>



--
"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