1 of 2
1
HD: 2004 Words
Posted: 29 July 2012 05:03 AM   [ Ignore ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4607
Joined  2007-01-03

Paywalls, podcasts, and pajamahadeen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 July 2012 10:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  345
Joined  2012-01-10

A super nitpick:

job creator, n. This euphemism of for a wealthy person appeared in 2004 as a justification for maintaining low taxes on them.

I don’t think the “of” after “euphemism” is needed.

(I, personally, would be tempted to apply an even more negatively-charged adjective to the term “job creator” than “euphemism”, but “euphemism” certainly works, and stronger language would probably just be a needless distraction.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 July 2012 12:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3417
Joined  2007-01-29

Another super nitpick:

Pajamahadeen, n. (with various spellings) A blend of pajama + mujahedeen, the pajamahadeen were bloggers who rigorously fact-checked and challenged mainstream media reporting of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. From the stereotypical image of blogger wearing pajamas.

“Reporting of” should be “...on.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 July 2012 06:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2781
Joined  2007-01-31

It seems to me that “of” or “on” are both acceptable here. (Well, either one, not both together.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2012 12:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1365
Joined  2007-01-29

Agreed. I wondered if it made any difference if you regard “media” as a noun or an adjective, but I don’t think it does. Both “of” and “on” are acceptable to my UK ears, too.

edit: Why is the verb “text” included in 2004 if its first citation is 1998?

[ Edited: 30 July 2012 12:52 AM by ElizaD ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2012 03:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4607
Joined  2007-01-03

I’ve been finding antedated terms throughout as I’ve been doing this (although more for these later years than earlier). When I go back and edit this for the book I’ll put them in the proper year.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 08:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1950
Joined  2007-02-19

Dave: one of the greatest satisfactions I have derived from this series, has been from watching your reaction to nitpicking: invariably good-humoured, tolerant, courteous (frequently with explicit “thanks”, and always with corrections, wherever these were called for) --- in short, the reaction of a civilized and cultivated individual.  The participants in this forum are not ordinary, everyday people - they’re a special breed. Their - our - nitpicking is not everyday nitpicking; it’s nitpicking à l’outrance; nitpicking pushed to the limit, as far as it will go. No typo, however trifling; no ambiguously-worded explanation, however debatable; no ill-chosen preposition --- no misplaced comma, even, is allowed to pass unnoticed, but is immediately hunted down and torn to pieces by a furiously baying, all-seeing, unforgiving, microscopically meticulous pack.

Let there be no mistake - i’m not in any way knocking the nitpicking; on the contrary, I love it. It’s part of what makes participation in wordorigins.org such a special pleasure. All I’m doing here is offering appreciation, where appreciation is due. Keep it up, Dave. Misplaced commas and all, you do a great job.

Salve Dave! Nitpickituri salutamus te! Hail, Dave! We who are about to nitpick, salute thee!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 11:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1365
Joined  2007-01-29

a furiously baying, all-seeing, unforgiving, microscopically meticulous pack

I don’t recognize anyone of that description.  Does anyone else here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 01:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1950
Joined  2007-02-19

I spoke in jocular hyperbole, ElizaD. Had you recognized, or thought you recognized, any mention of any individual member of this forum, I should have felt very distressed indeed at the misfiring of my attempt at a joke. That was not my intention. My use of those terms was made in the same spirit as that of the Over-75 Ladies’ Croquet team of Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh, who called themselves The Erinnyes (a name which they later changed to The Hellhounds, as being easier to spell and to pronounce). I am sorry if what was intended as innocuous (indeed, admiring and affectionate) banter has caused you (or any other member of this forum) the slighest pain or anger. It was certainly not meant to.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 01:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2301
Joined  2007-01-30

Not as a literal description, no, but then it isn’t meant as that. It’s caricature (in the best sense of the word).

lionello himself beat me to the draw!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 02:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  710
Joined  2007-02-07

We all know what this series is about and while a typo is nothing in blog post, it matters in a scholarly work. So I don’t see any nitpicking. I see open source editing, done by those with respect for the message, the medium, and the author.

Like everyone here, I feel fortunate to get this sneak peek at a book I will surely want to have.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 02:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1155
Joined  2007-02-14

I’m with happydog.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 03:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4607
Joined  2007-01-03

First, I don’t consider pointing out typos to be nitpicking. That’s just proofreading, for which I am glad to be getting so cheaply.

Second, while some of the picking could be qualified as being directed at nits, I appreciate that as well. Not only does it help me avoid death by a thousand small cuts, it is gratifying in that no one is finding major problems.

So again, thanks all.

There will be one more installment, covering 2006 to the present. It will be longer than usual, but there aren’t enough new words yet documented to justify separate years.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 09:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  246
Joined  2007-02-16

Dave, In the spirit of the foregoing, don’t forget the ‘water skies’ in the 2001 selection.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 August 2012 10:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1365
Joined  2007-01-29

Lionello, aldi et al: I also spoke in jocular hyperbole, in response to lionello’s jocular hyperbole.  It takes one to know one. 

Now it’s for you all to work out whether by “it takes one to know one” I meant a fellow hyperbole-user or a fellow nitpicker. I’m saying nowt. edit: Which reminds me of a good old Yorkshire saying:

Hear all, see all, say nowt.
Eat all, sup all, pay nowt.
And if tha ivver does owt fer nowt,
Do it fer thissen.

[ Edited: 01 August 2012 10:33 PM by ElizaD ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 August 2012 01:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2990
Joined  2007-02-26

Reporting of and reporting on are both perfectly cromulant but they don’t mean the same thing.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1
 
‹‹ HD: 2003 Words      Etymology quiz site ››