HD: 1916 Words
Posted: 23 June 2011 04:13 AM   [ Ignore ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4658
Joined  2007-01-03

The latest installment

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 June 2011 05:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3449
Joined  2007-01-29

Wonderful as always, and I’m particularly excited about proto-Indo-European!  As always, I have nitpicks.

Some German errors: under National Socialist, “Deutshe” (in Deutshe Arbeiterpartei) should be Deutsche, and “Arbeiterpartie” (in Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartie) s/b Arbeiterpartei; under U-boat, “unterseeboot” s/b Unterseeboot.

Under red giant, “Our sun will be become...”

Under looey, Why “in a way”?  It is another war word, it’s just from a different war.

Under tank, you say without qualification “in the hope that the Germans would believe the large metal objects being shipped to France were water tanks”; I thought there was dispute over why it was so named?

Not a nitpick but an addition: fuck-all “appears in a British trial transcript from this year,” and I thought I’d quote the full sentence to give the flavor of army English of the day:

He then said, “You are a fucking coward & you will go to the trenches—I give fuck all for my life & I give fuck all for yours & I’ll get you fucking well shot.”

(From Record of the Trial of H. Farr, quoted in Jesse Sheidlower’s invaluable The F Word.)

Edit: You call proto-Indo-European “the ancestor of most European and many central-Asian languages”; are you sure central-Asian (which I would write Central Asian) is what you mean?  Central Asia is normally taken to include Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, sometimes with nearby areas like Mongolia, and the only Indo-European language spoken there is Tajik (a variety of Persian/Farsi).  Did you mean South Asian?

[ Edited: 23 June 2011 07:19 AM by languagehat ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 June 2011 08:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4658
Joined  2007-01-03

Corrected. The source for the tank entry is the OED. If there is a dispute over this, I’m not aware of it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 June 2011 08:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  332
Joined  2007-02-13

I was intrigued seeing “Easter Rising” rather than “Easter Rebellion” listed in the events of April 1916.  I don’t remember when I first heard or read about it, but it was always the Easter Rebellion to me.  A little research on Google shows that both terms are pretty widely used.  Is one of them considered more American, and the other more Irish?  Was one term used earlier than the other?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2011 12:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  231
Joined  2008-07-19

"Easter Rising” is the term almost always used by people writing from an Irish nationalist perspective. “Easter Rebellion” used to be the commoner term used from a British perspective or a Northern Irish loyalist perspective. I think the point is that a rebellion implies a rising against a legitimate authority and the legitimacy of British rule in Ireland is disputable, depending on your point of view. Another politically-charged term just waiting to ensnare an innocent user.

I personally use Rising, but I’m aware that can be provocative even in some Scottish Unionist circles.

(Disclaimer - I’m a Scot born of mixed Scottish/Irish ancestry in London. Make of that what you will.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2011 04:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3026
Joined  2007-02-26

Always fascinating. I hope this is a successful venture for you.

BTW
moviedom, n. Hollywood likes to invent names for itself. This one is modeled after the slightly earlier filmdom.

Not a nitpick, per se, but I do note that this is a nicely anachronistic bit of metonomy.

Edit: A lesser man would blank his errors out, while I’ll leave mine for scrutiny. That’s not anachronistic at all.

[ Edited: 24 June 2011 04:14 AM by OP Tipping ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2011 06:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3449
Joined  2007-01-29

Corrected.

Except for the German ones…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2011 09:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4658
Joined  2007-01-03

Recorrected.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2011 07:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  649
Joined  2011-04-10

So, more fuel for thought with this new installment. 

I wondered if “superbug” may have paved the way for the first “Superman” who was portrayed as a villain, but I saw from wikipedia:

“The name Superman originated in the English translation of Friedrich Nietzsche’s statement, ”Ich lehre euch den Übermenschen” ("I will teach you the Superman"), in his 1883 work Also sprach Zarathustra. George Bernard Shaw popularized the term with his 1903 play Man and Superman. The character Jane Porter refers to Tarzan as a “superman” in the 1912 pulp novel Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs...”

And from Etymonline:

superman
1903, coined by George Bernard Shaw to translate Ger. Übermensch, “highly evolved human being that transcends good and evil,” from “Thus Spake Zarathustra” (1883-91), by Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). First used in German by Hermann Rab (1520s), and also used by Herder and Goethe. Translated as overman (1895) and beyond-man (1896) before Shaw got it right in his play title “Man and Superman” (1903). Application to comic strip hero is from 1938....”

For some reason, I more easily thought of ”Übermensch” as ”overman.” I understood the “superman” translation choice though I didn’t consciously connect it with the “Superman” of the comics.  For me, as a youngster, reading Nietzsche sort of precluded reading comics for fun…

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
‹‹ Lester, Gloster, Wooster      /aɪ/ in Canada ››