Comments on: Word up

By: MichaelS

MichaelS — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 22:14:02 +0000

1. “Although aggravate has been used in this manner for four hundred years, considerable controversy over this use exists today.” Hahaha! Typically, when something has been used for four centuries, it’s considered proper.
2. I understand the difference between anxious and eager, but I would tend to be anxious about a vacation and eager about a report card. Just me.
3. I didn’t know “chaff” meant anything other than “metallic confetti to keep radar-guided missiles from hitting you”. Interesting. (A few other words I hadn’t seen before too.)
4. What is “getting one’s just deserts” then? Am I getting my own abandonment?
5. According to wordnet.princeton.edu, “Enourmousness” means “unusual largeness”, while “enormity” means “largeness”. I’d never heard the former, and that’s exactly how I use the latter.
6. I don’t see the difference in their definitions of “fortuitous” and “fortunate”; both are “happening by chance”. I think the difference is that “fortuitous” means “I didn’t plan this” while “fortunate” means “I didn’t plan this, but I’m glad it happened”.
7. @Dennis Zaebst: “Lightening” means “making something lighter” whether “lighter” refers to the electromagnetic spectrum or weight. Usually you see “brighter” rather than “lighter” for colors, but both are used and correct.
8. I still think the word “n***er” is funny (how do you pronounce that–nasterisker? ); where I’m from, it’s a derivitave of [the spoken-only word] “niggro” which is a local/mis-pronuciation of “negro” which means “black”, and is synonymous with all of the above. It is often used offensively, but not because the word is offensive, but because it is used to describe colored people, who are considered inferior by those who use the word offensively. The same person using any other word to describe those same people would be using said other word just as offensively, negating the entire purpose of considering it offensive.
9. “Sanguine” most definately refers to blood in many contexts (role-playing games come to mind), but is much more often used to mean “like blood” (especially “blood-red”) than actually “of blood”. Princeton agrees with the blood-colored definition.

By: JackC

JackC — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 21:56:14 +0000

Elwood

Sounds like someone else here has brushed up on their Anguish Languish: http://www.crockford.com/wrrrld/anguish.html

“Murder, mare argo art toe swarm?”
“Yap, mar doling dodder, Hank yore clues honor higglery larme, An dun gore norther warder!”

By: John

John — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:03:05 +0000

Ignorance and Apathy

I don’t know and I don’t care.

By: Davidlpf

Davidlpf — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:17:44 +0000

beavis and butthead voice, “cool”.

By: Dennis Zaebst

Dennis Zaebst — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:02:14 +0000

@ Irishman:

Re: Winston Churchill on prepositions: Well, at least there is evidence that the anecdote might have been inappropriately attributed to him :>)

I just stuck that comment in as an afterthought as a bit of humor (at least it’s funny if you haven’t heard it a hundred times).

Thanks for the link…very interesting. I’m always ready to be proven wrong.

By: John Marley

John Marley — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:30:58 +0000

My inner grammar geek is crying. They forgot raise/rise. Also their/there/they’re.

By: Elwood Herring

Elwood Herring — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:48:03 +0000

Slight mistake – I meant this obviously:

“Putt knot yaw trussed inn spell chequers”

Damn spell checker didn’t spot that either!