[Ads-l] Quote: Kind to her inferiors. And where does she find them? (antedating Dorothy Parker 1941 January 4)

[Joel Berson]

Garson, I think you need to reconsider your addition below.  "Humility" was directed towards superiors, it's not the "condescension" that the good Doctor was (also) praising.
Joel     From: ADSGarson O'Toole <adsgarsonotoole at GMAIL.COM>
 To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU 
 Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2015 2:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [ADS-L] Quote: Kind to her inferiors. And where does she find them? (antedating Dorothy Parker 1941 January 4)
   
Thanks for your great feedback, LH. I feared that Boswell's use of
"condescension" might confuse readers, but I was too lazy to do
anything about it. Now I've added the following remark:

[Begin excerpt]
Please note that the word "condescension" now has a negative
connotation, but in the text above from Boswell the word was not
pejorative; instead, a praiseworthy humility was suggested.
[End excerpt]

Garson


On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:      American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:      Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Quote: Kind to her inferiors. And where does she find them?
>              (antedating Dorothy Parker 1941 January 4)
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> On Apr 19, 2015, at 1:18 PM, Joel Berson <berson at ATT.NET> wrote:
>>=20
>> I suggest that the 1867 quote, "respectful to superiors, and kind to =
> inferiors and equals", doesn't really belong to the chain of not being =
> able to find any inferiors. =20
>> It's rather in the tradition of the moral imperative of the late 17th =
> & 18th centuries to defer to one's superiors and be obliging (courteous, =
> civil, accommodating) and condescending (from the verb, "=E2=80=98To =
> depart from the privileges of superiority by a voluntary submission; to =
> sink willingly to equal terms with inferiours=E2=80=99 (Johnson)") to =
> one's inferiors.
>>=20
>> The first part of the 1770 quotation from Dr. Johnson, "she was =
> remarkable for her humility and condescension to inferiours, he =
> observed, that those were very laudable qualities", also fits this -- =
> humble before superiors, condescending towards inferiors. =20
>
>
> Notice also the positive meaning with which Dr. Sam imbues =
> "condescension".  That positive character for =
> "condescend"/"condescension" persisted at least through Jane Austen a =
> half-century later, but when and how did it disappear and turn to a =
> pejorative (at least in the U.S.)?  Has this revaluation been discussed =
> somewhere?  It's easier to find information about the innovation of new =
> senses or uses of words than the loss of old ones.  In fact, the current =
> U.S. senses of "condescend"--given by AHD as
>
> 1. To do something that one regards as beneath one's social rank or =
> dignity; lower oneself.=20
> 2. To behave in a patronizing or superior manner toward someone
>
> --are not exactly represented in OED entry (which as it happens includes =
> the Johnson quote cited in Garson's entry and repeated by Joel above); =
> for all that entry suggests, there's no pejorative flavo(u)r whatsoever =
> adhering to the use of "condescend" and its nominalization.
>
> LH
>
>
>
> LH
>>=20
>> I agree with Garson, however, that the second part of the witty =
> Johnson's observation does mesh with Dorothy Parker:  "but it might not =
> be so easy to discover who the lady=E2=80=99s inferiours were."
>> Joel
>> ________________________________
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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



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