Saturday, 3 March 2007 05:35 pm

(no subject)

deckardcanine: (Default)
[personal profile] deckardcanine
Years ago I learned the term "Janus word," which refers to a word with two contradictory, if not exact opposite, definitions. The one example provided in that source was "bad," counting the slang meaning. Unfortunately, I could think of no second example offhand, with the possible exception of "inflammable," tho I'm not sure how often it gets misused for "nonflammable." Thinking that the term was so seldom applicable as to be useful only in anglophilic trivia, I did not bother to engage in further research. I did, however, hope to discover examples by chance now and then.

For years, no such luck. Then it happened in the last month or two -- twice.

The first time was when I read a chapter of Richard Lederer's A Man of My Words dealing with differences between British and American English. Lederer reports an incident at a WWII conference in which Brits and Americans came into severe conflict until they realized that they had opposite interpretations of "tabling" a discussion. (I find myself preferring American language about 75% of the time. This is one case where I think Brits make more sense.)

The second case has more debatable legitimacy. I was confused by an author's use of "nonplussed," so I looked it up and discovered that my understanding was at odds with the traditional definition. But I was far from alone: The New York Times and ESPN, among other sources, have used it to mean "unimpressed" or "indifferent" instead of "completely perplexed." I suspect that in a couple decades, dictionaries will recognize both, much as they've come grudgingly to accept "flaunt" as a synonym for "flout."
Date: Sunday, 4 March 2007 07:18 pm (UTC)

From: [identity profile] deckardcanine.livejournal.com
Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th edition, says that "belie" can mean "to give a false impression of," "to present an appearance not in agreement with," "to show (something) to be false or wrong," "contradict," or "disguise." No other definitions are listed, and the American Heritage Dictionary online offers nothing more. So "misrepresent" is actually more legitimate. In any event, it's amazing how a word that's been in use in English about since the Norman Conquest should become useless only in the last few decades.

One of the raccoons in Gene Catlow's world is named Bemused. I wonder which meaning was intended there.
Date: Sunday, 4 March 2007 07:40 pm (UTC)

From: [identity profile] ruediix.livejournal.com
How about a "smashing good time" or to confuse matters "a smashing football riot"

Profile

deckardcanine: (Default)
Stephen Gilberg

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 1234 5 6
789101112 13
141516171819 20
212223 24252627
28293031   

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Friday, 26 December 2025 12:46 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios