Showing posts with label Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paul. Show all posts

Tuesday

The doting wife: servuxorial?

Trying to think of a response for you, Paul, concerning your response to "uxorious," I ran across this article from the National Review, a conservative biweekly magazine. They are actually letters concerning an article about Bill Clinton and Hillary written by William F. Buckley. He apparently "misused" the word uxorious, applying it to Hillary and her apparent attitudes and actions toward her husband (let's keep in mind, by the way, that this is from 2001). He received a deluge of pedanticism reprimanding him (well, I'm being hyperbolically savage about it; we all know I love words and discussions of their usage). He has, as Paul pointed out, a good excuse. There seems to be no word for a woman who is submissively doting to her husband.

Except, perhaps, uxorial, which is suggested in one of the letters. Buckley seems to agree, to a degree, with this proffer; he points out, thankfully, that uxorial "doesn't carry the sense of excessive, going no further than dutiful." Perhaps a clever elision with a good adjective might carry us there. (see subject)

Incidentally, Buckley uses a wonderful Latin phrase, mens rea, in one of his responses. It means "the intention to commit a wrongful act, the element that establishes criminal responsibility; a criminal mind."

I don't know a lot about Buckley (and I just know someone, or myself, will look up other articles he's written and I'll eat my words), but I'm quite fond of his reply to accusations of his "misapplication." As he says, "I knew that uxor is the wife, but I use(d) 'uxorious' to suggest excessive docility in either direction, i.e., husband to wife, wife to husband. It is a liberty, but something less than a neologism." Awwwwww. I feel for you, bro. His soi-disant linguistic rule, "for every word there was a felt need."

I feel the need

the need for speed!!!! (Cue high-five)

ABSCOND: Word of the #3 Day - October 28, 2005

Abscond (v.)

Pronunciation: [æb-'skahnd]

Definition: To leave surreptitiously to avoid prosecution, persecution, or some similar unpleasantry.

From the Latin abscondere ("to hide") from the roots ab "away" and condere "to put."

Paul, I considered your thought: leaving the roots of the words to the greater glory of the readers. I think we can trust the viewer's of this site to eschew usage of the internet in puzzling over the words. I'll start it next week, rules and all. It might be fun (and unifying) to have some sort of contest. I could mail out prizes! I'll look into it.

Incidentally (and I can explain why it is of incident), I would like to talk about interesting grammatical and literary points on this journal. I'm expanding my domain! Not on the internet, of course, but proverbially. I'm really getting carried away with this blogging (note: I've decided that Paul is right about the blog/journal thing; sorry, Alyssa. Blogs may only be personal web logs, I've looked into it. They need not pertain to social or political commentary - I do, however, really like the word "journal").

Oh, and why it is incidentally (because I rarely use words without having a precise meaning behind them; it's just a hound on my trail, a monkey on my back) - I was wondering about the difference between "into" and "in to." "In to" is used when the "to" is part of an infinitive phrase. "He looked in to see if Paul was there." "Into" is a preposition modifying action: "He walked into the house," "He looked into her soul."

You'll never read these again, will you? My speech is filled with bombastic orotundity and repetitious, reiterative redundancy. Gee, I wonder what the meaning of the root "re" is.

OROTUND: Word of the Day #2 - October 27, 2005

Orotund (adj.)

Pronunciation: ('or-ê-tênd)

Definition: (1) Clearly and elegantly articulated (speech), sonorous, full of deep, rounded sounds; (2) bombastic, pompous.

Originally, our word was used specifically to relate to clear and articulate speech, with round Os and thunderously rolling Rs, but that was quickly associated with stage actors and orators and we know how pompous they are (Out-ah, out-ah, brrrrrieeef cAn-dal!). Go ahead, speak orotundly (adv.) today. Speak your words with orotundity (n.).

Today's word is most certainly related to "rotund" and "rotunda," both coming from the Latin word "rotundo," meaning "round." It is also related to "oral" and "oreo" (though not nearly as closely; ok, I'm really stretching on that one), coming from ore, meaning "with the mouth." In fact, it specifically comes from the Latin phrase ore rotundo: "with a round mouth."