Welcome to the Wordlady blog!

This blog is about the fascinating, fun, and challenging things about the English language. I hope to entertain you and to help you with problems or just questions you might have with spelling and usage. I go beyond just stating what is right and what is wrong, and provide some history or some tips to help you remember. Is something puzzling you? Feel free to email me at wordlady.barber@gmail.com.
You can also order my best-selling books, Six Words You Never Knew Had Something to do With Pigs and Only in Canada You Say. Fun and informative!

Subscribe!

Subscribe! Fun facts about English delivered weekly right to your inbox. IT'S FREE! Fill in your email address below.
Privacy policy: we will not sell, rent, or give your name or address to anyone. You can unsubscribe at any point.

Follow by email

Search This Blog

Saturday, July 4, 2020

What's in a name?

The Barber map
Wordlady loves the stories behind words, as you know. But she also loves the stories behind names: first names, family names, place names. The study of names is called "onomastics", from the Greek onoma meaning "name".

She also loves maps, so just imagine how excited she gets about a website that combines names and maps! So with my Namelady hat on, I would like to introduce you to the "Named" website, which I am sure will give you some fun.

"Named" maps places in  the UK where one (or two) surnames have a historically unusually high local population. It uses a recent UK electoral roll and was created in 2016. The data include names that are not originally British as well as names that go back to Anglo-Saxon times. If  you have a rare name it won't show the data for privacy reasons as it might allow someone to zero in on your house.

All you do is enter your surname, and the website maps where in the UK there is an unusually high number of people with that surname living.

The creator of the website, geographer Ollie O'Brien, has this to say about it:
Although it uses relatively recent data, it may well show you where your surname was historically most concentrated. It has been demonstrated that most traditional UK surname distributions remain surprisingly unchanged over many years – internal migration in the UK is a lot less than might be traditionally perceived.

The map shows places where you are unusually likely to bump into somebody with that name. In very rural areas  you don’t need to have very many people with a name for it to show up as a hotspot, because there aren’t very many people with any other names either. Whereas, in more populated parts of the country, you need a large number of people.

Give it a spin with your family names here
Let me know what you find out!

If you want to share your map with friends and relatives, you can right-click on the circle with the map in it, and choose "Save image as..."


To see all Wordlady posts, click here: https://katherinebarber.blogspot.com/

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Whetting your appetite

Photo by Manki Kim on Unsplash

I recently saw someone online criticizing an editor for not correcting the past tense "whet" to "whetted".

This got me thinking.

Is "whet" in fact a possible past tense for "whet"? Is it perhaps a holdover from former days? "Whet" is clearly an Anglo-Saxon word; that "wh-" is a dead giveaway (it would have been "hw-" in Anglo-Saxon).

Non Anglo-Saxon words ending in -et, like "vet", all have regular conjugations, i.e. vet, vetted, vetted; jet, jetted, jetted. But if you think of single-syllable Anglo-Saxon verbs ending in -et that are very much more common than "whet":
"set", "let",
they are identical in the present and the past tenses: today I set the table, yesterday I set the table.

And thus it was with "whet", the past and past participle of which were "whet" from its origins, and for centuries thereafter. It was only in the Middle English period (after the Norman Conquest) that the regular conjugation "whetted" cropped up, eventually taking over, but not till the 1700s. The same phenomenon happened with "fret".

But although "whetted" is clearly dominant at the moment, the past form "whet" has continued to burble along, not dying out in the 1700s as the OED would have it.

Similarly, "whet"'s homophone "wet" had (and still has) a past and past participle "wet" from earliest times, having acquired the variant "wetted" only since the 1500s. I would say that "wetted" is still a second runner against "wet" as you can see in this chart:


And although it sounds ok (sort of?) to say "he wetted his finger" rather than "he wet his finger", I don't think it sounds at all idiomatic to say "the child wetted the bed".

So, when you combine
  1. the fact that "whet" isn't  a terribly frequent word (occurring between 0.1 and 1.0 times per million words in typical modern English usage. )
  2. with the very strong influence of common analogous words like "set", "let", and especially the homophone "wet",
  3. and the fact that past "whet" is an old form that still survives,
it's not at all surprising that someone might (and some people do, according to corpus evidence) use "whet" rather than "whetted" as a past tense of "whet". It could be argued that it is a minority variant form. Failing to change "whet" to "whetted", as editing "errors" go, is hardly the most egregious mistake.

As I have said before, when you come across a usage different than your own, it's so much more rewarding (though time-consuming) to start with the reaction "I wonder..." than to simply crow "WRONG!!" and march onward, feeling superior.

"Whet" is a word we don't use much in its literal sense of "sharpen" anymore. Exceptions are historical fiction and poetry, though it is rare there too. "I'm going to whet this knife and then slice me some tomatoes for a sandwich" sounds vaguely ridiculous and somehow sinister. (I do however have an object in my kitchen drawer that I still call a "whetstone", along with a different object that I call a "knife sharpener"). We don't react to the clanging bell of a van passing through the neighbourhood by saying, "Oh the knife whetter is here!" 

What we do whet nowadays is someone's appetite or, to a lesser degree, their curiosity.

What we shouldn't whet is our whistle. This is the other "wet". The expression "wet someone's whistle" means to have a drink, the "whistle" in question being the voice.

Would you say "it has whet my appetite" or only "it has whetted my appetite"? Would you have to think about it before you chose a form?

* The force of analogy is also noticeable with the much more recent verb "pet", about the etymology and past tense of which you can read in this post. Since someone asked that question five years ago, I have certainly noticed "pet" being used as a past tense.

Friday, June 19, 2020

Shingles (the roof kind and the illness)

Photo by Austin Walker on Unsplash
A friend of mine came down with the painful ailment known as shingles last week. All her friends commiserated on Facebook and wished her a speedy recovery.

I, meanwhile, heartless as usual, was thinking:
  1. What does that have to do with the shingles on my roof?
  2. Is "shingles" singular or plural?
Actually I did wish her well too! Shingles is a horrible affliction.

First question: What does that have to do with the shingles on my roof?

Well.... nothing.

These are two entirely different words.

The roofing shingles, like so many architecture words, apparently came into English from French after the Norman Conquest, though no such word now survives in French. It is thought that it came from Latin scindula, a later form of scandula ‘a split piece of wood’.

There are a couple of idioms associated with this word:

hang out one's shingle
(apparently only North American, though I did not know this before)
  • Begin to practise a profession.

    ‘a license to hang out their shingle as a financial adviser’

And the ever inventive Australians have come up with
a shingle short
Australian informal

(of a person) stupid or slightly mad.

The malady "shingles", on the other hand, which also came into English in the Middle English period, comes from Latin cingulus (a girdle or belt), because the red rash caused by it looks like a belt around the torso. This description can be better detected in the modern German name for the disease, Gürtelrose. The medical name for the condition also includes this idea of a girdle: herpes zoster comes ultimately from Greek zōstēr ‘girdle, belt, and herpēs, literally ‘creeping’, from herpein ‘to creep’.

2nd question: Is "shingles" singular or plural?

As you can see, the "s" at the end of "shingles" is not etymologically an indicator of a plural; it's just the "s" in the Latin cingulus. So technically "shingles" is a singular noun, and treated as such.

shingles is a painful, blistering skin rash that affects more than 1 million Americans every year

It can be plural when the emphasis is on the resulting blisters rather than the illness itself (The shingles were extremely painful), although I don't think it's possible to create a singular "shingle". But most of the people on my friend's Facebook post referred to the disease in the plural, no doubt influenced, as we English speakers are so much, by that final s.

One good result of this: it reminded me I was due for the booster on my shingles vaccine, so I hustled off to the drugstore to have that taken care of.  I wish it hadn't taken her coming down with it to give me that nudge.

To see all Wordlady posts, click here: https://katherinebarber.blogspot.com/

Friday, June 12, 2020

What's a boulevard?



Thank you to everyone who confirmed the Great Budgie/Parakeet Divide. I have to admit, my mind is still blown by this.

Now to something else that goes by different names in different places: the strip of vegetation between a sidewalk and a road. Consider the picture above. This is that thing at Chateau Wordlady (I love irises and chives, what can I say?). You can see the sidewalk in the lower right hand corner.

I call it a boulevard, as I think would most Western Canadians. In the Canadian Oxford Dictionary we have this usage of boulevard labelled "Cdn & Upper Midwest & North Central US".

Wikipedia has dug up an astounding number of names for this, including "parkway",  "verge", "berm", "curb strip", "curb lawn" and even the intriguing "hellstrip". For the full list with their geographical distribution, see here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_verge. And please let me know what you say and where you learned that word (although I have lived in Toronto for 30 years, I will betray my Winnipeg roots with this word to the end of my days).

Another boulevard labelled "Cdn & Upper Midwest & North Central US" is the planted median down the middle of a wide road in an urban area. Other names for this elsewhere are "median (strip)" or "central reservation".

Boulevard is more generally used to mean "a broad street, often planted with rows of trees." In Winnipeg, what differentiated this kind of boulevard from a mere avenue or street was a median strip planted with trees.

The model for these was the boulevards of Paris, the first of which was created by Louis XIV's famous military engineer Vauban, who in 1670 demolished the city wall of Paris going from Porte St-Denis to the Bastille, to create a pedestrian promenade. On the modern-day map of Paris you can still detect along this route the outline of the old city wall. I would not recommend strolling down the middle of  Boulevard Beaumarchais today though.



The origin of the word "boulevard" is connected with these city walls. 

In the 14th century, both English and French borrowed a Dutch word bolwerc for a defensive fortification, a rampart. By the 16th century this had become "boulevard" in French, and ... "bulwark" in English. The literal military meaning was extended in English to the figurative "powerful defence or safeguard" sense of "bulwark": the Plain English Campaign – a force for the democratic good, a bulwark against jargon, legalese, obfuscation and spin.  In French, "boulevard" continued to designate fortifications, especially the flat horizontal part along the top where sentries walked up and down. So when Vauban eliminated the actual "boulevard", the word survived to designate the broad thoroughfare thus created.

Over the next two centuries, Paris's various city walls came down and were replaced with more "boulevards". British visitors in the 18th century liked to show off that they'd been to Paris by using French words for things they'd seen there ("hotel" was another borrowing from this time) and so we acquired "boulevard", little realizing that it was a doublet of "bulwark".

Parisian boulevards really came into their own with Baron Haussmann's wholesale renovation of the city in the mid-19th century which bequeathed the city with many broad, elegant, tree-lined streets, often tracing the line of the former city walls. Soon every city had to have some, even if they couldn't rival Paris for beauty.

Here's the rather unfortunate Lagimodière Boulevard in Winnipeg.


Well, it's broad. And it's got a centre median. And some kind of vegetation.

Baron Haussmann is no doubt turning in his grave.

Don't forget you can easily share Wordlady posts by email or on social media by clicking on the links at the bottom of the post.





Friday, June 5, 2020

Budgies and parakeets


I had one of those "What? Americans don't say that?" moments this week when reading Lynne Murphy's excellent blog about the differences between British and American English, where she asserts

But there is a meaning difference for parakeet. AmE uses that name for the little birds that are kept as pets, what BrE (and some US pet bird enthusiasts) call budgerigars or budgies, for short.

Whaaaaat?  No budgies in the US? I had no idea. I am pretty sure that "budgie" is the common name in Canada, rather than "parakeet".

A corpus search does indeed reveal a relative dearth of budgies in the US, compared to Canada and other English-speaking countries.

If you are Canadian or American, please let me know what you call this bird**.

Budgie dates from the 1930s, while its parent, "budgerigar", was a mid 19th-century Australian borrowing of Aboriginal origin, perhaps an alteration of gijirrigaa, the bird's name in Kamilaroi (the language of an Indigenous Australian people whose lands extend from New South Wales to southern Queensland). A budgerigar is a kind of parakeet (a small parrot):

a small gregarious Australian parakeet which is green with a yellow head in the wild. It is popular as a cage bird and has been bred in a variety of colours.

I have always loved it when dictionaries use the word "gregarious" in fauna definitions. I can't help having images of the budgies getting together with their pals for a tea party.

"Parakeet", on the other hand, is a mid 16th-century borrowing from Old French paroquet, Italian parrocchetto, and Spanish periquito; its origin is uncertain, perhaps (via Italian) based on a diminutive meaning ‘little wig’, referring to head plumage, or (via Spanish) based on a diminutive of the given name Pedro.

Now, I know that if I don't head you off at the pass, some of you are going to mention in the comments or in emails a famous Australianism / New Zealandism:

budgie smugglers

plural noun

informal Australian, New Zealand

Men's brief, tight-fitting swimming trunks. [what other varieties of English call "Speedos"]

‘Tarzan, as we dubbed him, took to wearing the tiniest pair of purple budgie smugglers while sunbathing on his corrugated iron roof

The OED, which dates this term from 1998, explains its etymology primly thus:

With reference to the appearance of the male genitals in figure-hugging trunks.

Here's a picture if you lack imagination.

"Parakeet smuggler" just doesn't have the same ring to it.


**By the way, it was lovely hearing from so many of you about "chesterfield" and your linguistic bios. It would seem that "chesterfield" is still alive and well among the over-seventies. So not dead! But it certainly has faded away amongst those younger than that.
Those in their forties, fifties and sixties reported "I used that as a kid, or my parents used it, but sometime in the 1970s/80s I switched over to couch or sofa."
There is a furniture chain in greater Toronto called The Chesterfield Shop. According to their website it is, tellingly, "a family-owned furniture store since 1948", but, equally tellingly, the tabs on their website are for "sofas" and "sofa beds".  So I think "chesterfield" in their name is a kind of fossil.

Budgie photo by Bianca Ackermann on Unsplash
Swimmer photo by Mika on Unsplash

Saturday, May 30, 2020

Chesterfield: not quite dead

The cockles of my little Canadian heart were warmed this week when I read that the Crime Writers of Canada 2020 Arthur Ellis Prize has been awarded to 58-year-old Albertan author Wayne Arthurson's The Red Chesterfield, which features a severed foot found in an abandoned sofa. Coincidentally, I had just seen another mention of "chesterfield" in a novel by 62-year-old Nova Scotian Anne Emery the night before. (This is called the first law of lexicography: just when you think a word might not exist, you read it in the paper or hear it on TV.)

For decades in the 20th century, "chesterfield" was a shibboleth of Canadian English. Canadians, and only Canadians, called a multi-seated upholstered piece of furniture a chesterfield rather than a couch or a sofa.

In other varieties of English, a chesterfield is a specific kind of sofa, the kind you might find in smoky gentlemen's clubs, upholstered in tufted leather, with the back and the arms of the same height.


But starting in the early years of the 20th century, Canadians started to apply the word generically to any kind of sofa. There were scatterings of this usage in the US but they faded away. In Canada, "chesterfield" had its heyday through the 1970s, but started to wane, until by the 1990s, fewer than 10% of Torontonians in their twenties were saying "chesterfield", having abandoned it in favour of "couch".

I grew up calling this piece of furniture a chesterfield, but shifted to "sofa", sometime in the eighties, which seems to have been "peak sofa" time in North America. I do use "couch" occasionally. But "sofa", too, has lost the battle to "couch" with most North Americans, although it is still the preferred term for the British.

But "chesterfield" is not yet dead, especially outside Toronto, witness the two authors I have mentioned, who though not spring chickens, are not really old either (I may be a bit biased in this assessment). Where they live is also significant. Searches in Canadian newspapers for the last three years turned up a few dozen chesterfields (fortunately not including severed feet) in the Prairies, BC, and Atlantic Canada. They were, however, vastly outnumbered by couches (over 20,000 hits) and, struggling along, sofas (5,800 hits).

If you're a Canadian, what do you call this item of furniture? Have you ever called it a "chesterfield"? And if so, how old are you and what part of the country are you from? I would love to keep "chesterfield" alive, but I fear it is doomed. The language evolves organically and there is little we can do to change it.

A bit of etymology for these three words:

Sofa ultimately goes back to Arabic ṣoffah, a slightly raised platform covered with carpet and cushions, on which people could sit or recline. It was applied to what we know as a sofa in the 1700s.

Chesterfields are named for one of the 19th-century Earls of Chesterfield.

Couch comes from French coucher, a typical squishing-down of  Latin collocāre to lay in its place, from  com- together + locāre to place.

A HUGE thank you to the many of you who generously contributed to Wordlady's crowdfunding campaign! MWAH! Those of you who did, there is a special Wordlady bonus post waiting in your mailbox (if you haven't seen it yet).

Monday, May 25, 2020

Wordlady has a request

Wordlady has been entertaining and informing you with free blog posts for over ten years now; the archive contains over 600 posts.

Would you consider contributing so that this can continue? Contribution is entirely voluntary.

You can choose your amount from the drop-down menu and then click on the PayPal "Add to cart" button below. If you're feeling particularly generous, you can "buy" multiple quantities.

You can pay from your PayPal account if you have one, or by using your credit card. 

If you are in Canada, you can also use Interac e-transfer to wordlady.barber@gmail.com

**PLEASE NOTE: If you are reading this as an email that has been delivered directly to your inbox, you will have to go to the Wordlady site for the PayPal button to work:
https://katherinebarber.blogspot.com/2020/05/wordlady-has-request.html

Amounts are in Canadian dollars. 
Currently $10 CAD is about $7.20 US, 6 pounds sterling.

Thank you! 
Katherine
 

Contribution levels

Saturday, May 23, 2020

Object lesson

A Wordlady reader has inquired whether 

a striking practical example of a principle or ideal

is an 
object lesson 

or an 
abject lesson.

One can see how these two words can be confused in some varieties of North American English where a "short O" and a "short A" can be pronounced very similarly.

Also "object lesson" is hardly transparent.

But "object lesson" it is. 

Originally, an object lesson was a lesson in which a pupil's examination of a material object was the basis for teaching, to help understanding of an abstract notion. For instance, students would hold in their hand a familiar object (a seashell, a thimble...) and describe it in depth.


This type of lesson was promoted by the late 18th century Swiss educator Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, in contrast to the then current practice of rote learning, memorization, and recitation. Object lessons became very popular in Victorian times. The object being described would have been considered a typical example of its kind.

By the late 1800s, "object lesson" had taken on its current figurative meaning of a striking example. 

In current practice, it is also used in religious education to mean a type of demonstration with real objects that illustrates a moral or religious principle.

"Abject" on the other hand is an adjective with a few meanings:
  • 1. (of something bad) experienced or present to the maximum degree: his letter plunged her into abject misery | abject poverty.
    • (of a situation or condition) extremely unpleasant and degrading: the abject condition of the peasants.
  • 2. (of a person or their behaviour) completely without pride or dignity; self-abasing: an abject apology. 
Now, some people may have very unhappy memories of school, and so they may consider those days as "extremely unpleasant and degrading", but all the same, they were not "abject lessons". 
Obviously, these words are etymologIcally related. Both came into English in about 1400 from Latin. "Object" is from objectum (thing presented to the mind) from ob- (in the way of) + jacere (to throw).  "Abject" came from Latin abjectus (rejected), from ab- (away) + jacere (to throw).

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

Garnish and garnishee

A Canadian (this is significant) Wordlady fan has written with the following question:
The latest TIME magazine features ... One woman [who] had to contend with having her wages "garnished" by a collection agency after losing her job [i.e. she had some money taken off her wages and given to a collection agency before the money even landed in her bank account]. I thought the legal term was "garnisheed"? And is there any connection to the usual meaning of "to garnish," i.e. to enhance or improve by some adornment? How odd that the word can imply both subtraction and addition! Can you explain?
This is a very complicated word. Bear with me; I will get there eventually!

We borrowed "garnish" from French garnir in the 1400s. In Modern French, garnir means "to furnish or provide", and this is what it meant back in the 15th century too, but more specifically
To furnish (a place) with means of defence; to garrison; to supply with men, arms, and provisions.
The means of defending a place, and the soldiers who defended it, were called a "garnison". In time this morphed into "garrison" in English, but garnison is still the word in French.

The French word was probably derived from a Germanic word that had also given Anglo-Saxon the word "warn".  (There are quite a few g-/w-pairs like this between English and French, see also wallop). 

At this point the words "warn" and "garnish" shared the idea "prepare someone to defend themself, by providing either advance knowledge or arms, soldiers, etc."

At the same time, "garnish" was used less bellicosely to mean "provide with embellishments", and by 1600 this was being used particularly of decorating food.  By this time, the verb had long since also become a noun.

The early martial senses died out, and we were left with... parsley.

Meanwhile however, the connection of "garnish" with "warn" took on a life of its own. 

Starting in the 1500s, "garnish" was being used in legal circles to mean "warn a debtor to pay up"; the action of doing this was also called a "garnish". The person who was subject to such a court order was called the "garnishee".

By the late 1800s, things had gone beyond warning to action, and both "garnish" and "garnishee" were being used as verbs to mean "take a debtor's wages by court order".

Although both verbs exist in this sense in all varieties of English, it appears that  the verb "garnishee" is more popular in Canada than elsewhere, because Canadians are more likely to "garnishee" someone's wages than to "garnish" them (though both terms are used). 

In the US, the verb "garnish" is preferred, with "garnishee" being reserved for the noun designating the person being garnished. In British law, a "garnishee order" is now known more transparently as a "third party debt order".

The following, however, is definitely a mistake:
A few weeks later however a more organised rally garnished fifty-thousand protesters
The word they wanted was "garnered", which originally referred to grain being stored up and comes from the same root as "granary" and French grenier (attic).

Unless of course someone sprinkled parsley over the 50,000. Or took part of their wages.

Hey Wordlady fans! Wordlady would love it if you could share her posts with your friends on social media!
For previous Wordlady posts, click here

Sunday, May 17, 2020

Pretentious, moi?


A Wordlady fan inquired recently about the word "pretentious", and I was surprised to learn that it is much younger than I would have suspected.  Here's the OED's earliest quotation
1832   T. Carlyle in Fraser's Mag. May 382/2   [He] lived no day of his life without doing and saying more than one pretentious ineptitude.
But surely there were pretentious people and things before 1832? What did we call them?

There are many words in this semantic field that are still in common use today: 
affected
artificial 
overblown
ostentatious 
pompous
But there are others that in my opinion deserve a revival for this sense:

flatulent
1863   Notes & Queries 3rd Ser. 4 284   Much of the poetry is little more than very flatulent declamation.

hi cockalorum ("cockalorum" was a magician's incantation like "abracadabra" or "hocus pocus" and thus came to stand for meaningless speech)
1887   Hardwicke's Sci.-gossip Apr. 83/2   The dogmatic hi-cockalorum style of men absolutely certain of their own correctness.
The Scots and Irish apparently have at their disposal
long nebbed (literally, having a long beak; figuratively, inquisitive; of language, polysyllabic)

But I think my favourite is 
coxcombic(al),
(roosters being notorious for being full of themselves).

Consider this fabulous stream of insults and see if you can think of anyone you would like to apply it to currently:
1879   Reynolds's Newspaper 21 Sept. 3/1   That feeble-minded, self-opinionated, coxcombic mixture of imbecility, assurance and inordinate self-esteem.

SPELLING

"Pretentious" and "pretension" constitute possibly one of the most annoying pairs of words in English. Why is "pretentious" spelled with a "t" whereas "pretension" is spelled with an "s"? 

As we have seen, "pretentious" is a fairly recent addition to English. We borrowed it from French prétentieux which in 1789 or thereabouts had acquired the meaning "making an exaggerated outward display, ostentatious, showy"

"Pretension" is much older in English; we borrowed it from Latin in the 1400s. The classical Latin form was   praetention (the act of pretending) but a post-classical form praetension had cropped up. In the early days we merrily spelled the word with a -tion ending, an -sion ending, or even a -cion ending. Quite frankly, I don't know why the -sion ending won out, but by the 1700s it was firmly established, and it is the only spelling listed in Samuel Johnson's dictionary.

So by the time "pretentious" came along, imitating the French spelling, it couldn't win against the entrenched spelling of "pretension".

If I were Queen of English, I would definitely do something about this. Since there are no current (and very few obsolete) words in English ending in -sious, I would decree that instead of changing pretentious to pretensious,  pretension should be changed to pretention. 

It is true that the following verbs ending in -d  form their derivative in -sion:
ascend ascension
apprehend apprehension
comprehend comprehension
extend extension
condescend condescension
suspend suspension
But on the other hand (God forbid that English should be consistent) we have
intend intention 
contend contention
French lives quite happily with prétention and prétentieux. Why do we have to make our lives complicated? 
Warning: I am not (alas) Queen of English, so you'll have to keep spelling pretension with an s.

Friday, May 15, 2020

You can help the Oxford English Dictionary

Can you help the OED and its readers by conducting some linguistic detective work?


Antedating appeal


In the 20 years since the full-scale revision of the OED started, the range of online resources available to the Dictionary’s editors has increased almost exponentially. This means that for the entries we worked on in the early years of the project, there’s a good chance of being able to improve upon the dates of our earliest quotations by searching in a number of now readily accessible databases that simply weren’t available then. Because we initially worked alphabetically, starting in the middle, this applies especially to entries between M and R.
For example:
  • mendacity: antedated from 1646 to 1540 using Early English Books Online; likewise moonbeam (to 1535 from 1600), multiplication table (1657 from 1662)
  • masonic: antedated from 1786 to 1761 using Eighteenth-Century Collections Online (ECCO); likewise moonlit (to 1783 from 1817)
  • menopause: antedated from 1872 to 1858 using Google Books; likewise melodramatically (to 1820 from 1836)
  • meanie: antedated from 1927 to 1902 using NewspaperArchive; likewise mellophone (to 1901 from 1913)
  • mom: antedated from 1894 to 1846 using newspaper databases on ProQuest
And this is where you come in. As editors are concentrating on updating the unrevised text of the OED, it is unlikely that they will be able to go back systematically over the revised ranges for some time. Carrying on the long tradition of crowdsourcing employed by the OED, we’d like to invite you to try your hand at antedating any sense that has been revised or added in the range M-R, and to submit your findings using this link: https://public.oed.com/appeals/oed-antedatings/

Useful sources of information include:
  • Early English Books Online (EEBO)
  • Eighteenth-Century Collections Online (ECCO)
  • Google Books
  • Any substantial historical newspaper database that features facsimiles of original pages (there are many suppliers of these, including Gale, NewspaperArchive, ProQuest, and Trove).
Some of these databases are freely available; others may be available to you through membership of an institution such as a library or university. Try the collection of corpora at BYU:
https://www.english-corpora.org/

Monday, May 4, 2020

Flower and flour


Photo by Mae Mu on Unsplash

For Mother's Day, get your mum some flowers

Or if she really likes baking, you could get her a variety of flours (which currently seem harder to come by).

The two words were in fact once the same. 

The Latin word for the prettiest part of a plant, floris, became flour in Old French (subsequently fleur). Very quickly it acquired another meaning: “the choicest part of a plant”. Applied to wheat, this was the part used for baking. 

For centuries, “flour” had both meanings in English, then we changed the spelling to “flower”. In the 18th century someone had the bright idea to use one spelling for the wheat meal and the other for blooms.

Don't forget! Sign up for Wordlady Online starting with Hebrew and Yiddish Words in English. More information here:  https://katherinebarber.blogspot.com/2020/04/hebrew-and-yiddish-words-in-english.html

Saturday, May 2, 2020

Floe or flow?

In my post about spring breakup, I referred to floating slabs of ice as

ice floes

One occasionally sees this misspelled 

ice flows

"Floe" is a surprisingly recent word in English, the first evidence dating only from 1817. It probably comes from Norse flo layer, level piece. I do not know what they were called before the 19th century.

In Newfoundland and the Canadian north, the term "ice pan" is also used. 

"Flow", on the other hand, dates back to Anglo-Saxon times as a verb and to the 15th century as a noun, and has not really changed in meaning over that time.

Don't forget! Sign up for Wordlady Online starting with Hebrew and Yiddish Words in English. More information here:  https://katherinebarber.blogspot.com/2020/04/hebrew-and-yiddish-words-in-english.html

 

About Me

My photo
Canada's Word Lady, Katherine Barber is an expert on the English language and a frequent guest on radio and television. She was Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Oxford Dictionary. Her witty and informative talks on the stories behind our words are very popular. Contact her at wordlady.barber@gmail.com to book her for speaking engagements; she can tailor her talks to almost any subject. She is also available as an expert witness for lawsuits.