Several friends have asked that I post some of my astrophotographs to the web, so I’ve added a section to the website to do just that. I’ll also probably add occasional blog posts on what works and doesn’t work about my photography of the night skies.

Bear in mind that I’m still pretty new at this and am refining my techniques, so most of these images are flawed in one way or another. But I’m learning.

What sholde I tellen ech proporcion
Of thynges whiche that we werche upon—
[...]
And of the esy fir, and smart also,
Which that was maad, and of the care and wo
That we hadde in oure matires sublyming,
And in amalgamyng and calcenyng
Of quyksilver, yclept Mercurie crude?

(What should I tell of each proportion
Of things which that we work upon—
[...]
And of the slow fire, and hot also,
Which that was made, and of the care and woe
That we had in our matters subliming,
And in amalgamating and calcining
Of quicksilver, called raw Mercury?)¹

The name quicksilver, seen in the Chaucer quote, is even older, dating to Old English. It’s found in a medical text known as Bald’s Leechbook, found in London, British Library, Royal 12, D xvii.:

Wiþ magan wærce, rudan sæd & cwicseolfor & eced bergen on neaht nestig.
(For strong pain, taste rue seed & quicksilver & vinegar on a fasting night.)²

Quicksilver is so called because mercury is liquid at room temperature and the drops move quickly across surfaces on which they are placed.

The chemical symbol for mercury is Hg, from the Latin hydrargyrum, which is taken from the Greek ύδράργυρος (hydrargyros), or liquid silver.³

¹Oxford English Dictionary, mercury, 3rd Edition, September 2009, Oxford University Press, accessed 6 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00306198.

²Oxford English Dictionary, quicksilver, 3rd Edition, September 2009, Oxford University Press, accessed 6 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50195025.

³Oxford English Dictionary, hydrargyrum, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 6 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50109810. 

MR. BARNHOUSE: The lawsuit would be...the lawsuit itself would be property, but the...but any recovery would not be property until it became choate, until there was an amount of money assigned to it.
JUSTICE SCALIA: There is no such adjective—I know we have used it, but there is no such adjective as “choate.” There is “inchoate,” but the opposite of “inchoate” is not “choate.”
MR. BARNHOUSE: All right.
JUSTICE SCALIA: Any more than the...I don’t know.
(Laughter.)
MR. BARNHOUSE: Well, I’m wrong on the...on the…
JUSTICE SCALIA: Exactly. Yes. It’s like “gruntled.”
MR. BARNHOUSE: But I think I am right on the law, Your Honor.
JUSTICE SCALIA: Exactly. “Disgruntled” and the opposite of “disgruntled” is “gruntled.”
MR. BARNHOUSE: Is “gruntled.”
(Laughter.)

Choate does appear in the OED, which the 2nd edition labels as “erroneous.” (A comment that is sure to disappear when it is updated for the 3rd edition.) Interestingly, the first citation is from another famous Supreme Court justice:

1878 O. W. HOLMES Let. 9 Dec. in Pollock-Holmes Lett. (1942) I. 11 Several of the State Courts have left equally amusing slips in the Reports [...] I have read in a California volume that the wife on marriage acquires an inchoate right of dower which by the death of the husband becomes choate.

There’s also a 1929 citation from Winston Churchill, so the word has some support from heavy hitters in the world of letters. Scalia might reconsider if he knew of these citations; then again, maybe not.

A search of Wordnik.com doesn’t turn up any other dictionary entries, but it does show a number of uses on the interwebs.

The full episode can be seen here. (Warning: the full episode is NSFW)

Obrizum, smaete gold.
(Obrizum, refined gold).

And the Christ Church, Canterbury, Codex Aureus has this inscription from c.870:

Ic Aelfred aldormon ond Werburg min gefera begetan ðas bec æt haeðnum herge mid uncre claene feo, ðæt ðonne wæs mid clæne golde.
(I Alfred, alderman, and Werburg, my wife, obtained this book at a heathen temple with our pure money, that then was with pure gold.)¹

The chemical symbol for gold is Au, from the Latin name for the metal, aurum.

¹Oxford English Dictionary, gold¹, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 5 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50096546. 

The chemical symbol for platinum is Pt.

¹Oxford English Dictionary, platinum, 3rd Edition, June 2009, Oxford University Press, accessed 4 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50181099.

Anita Krishnakumar over at the blog Concurring Opinions has a posting on how the Supreme Court uses (what they think is) the passive voice to interpret statutes. At issue is the belief that sections of criminal statutes that outline the elements of a crime that must be proved in court are written in the active voice, while elements that merely affect the severity of sentences are in the passive. What the justices and Ms. Krishnakumar fail to realize, that in the cases in question, the entire statute is written in the passive voice. There is no differentiation at all.

The case of Jones v. United States (1999) the statute in question reads:

Whoever, possessing a firearm as defined in section 921 of this title, takes a motor vehicle [...] from the person or presence of another by force and violence or by intimidation, or attempts to do so, shall—

(1) be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both,

(2) if serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of this title) results, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 25 years, or both, and

(3) if death results, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any number of years up to life, or both.

Justice Kennedy, in a dissent joined by three other justices, concluded that “there is some significance in the use” of the passive voice sections (2) and (3) are in the passive voice, and are therefore merely sentencing recommendations, while section (1) was active and therefore establish the elements of the crime that the prosecution must prove., and significance in the use of the active voice in the main section, and presumably in section (1). Exactly what Kennedy is labeling as passive is unclear.

In either case, Kennedy has screwed something up. He either mislabels a passive construction as active, or he mislabels two active constructions as passive. The trouble is, all three sections are passive ("shall be [...] fined"). Sections (2) and (3) introduce additional conditions, but there is no change in voice. Fortunately, in the decision of the court, Justice Souter gets the grammar right and correctly identifies the difference as conditional, not active v. passive.

Is it too much to expect that the Supreme Court of the United States, if they are to use linguistic analysis in deciding cases, understand the basic principles of grammar?

[Edited 5 November 2009. Hat tip to Geoffrey Pullum over at Language Log.]

I should incline to call this metal Iridium, from the striking variety of colours which it gives, while dissolving in marine acid.¹

The word iridescent also comes from the goddess’s name.

The chemical symbol for iridium is Ir.

¹Oxford English Dictionary, iridium, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 3 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50121124. 

A pungent and peculiar smell [...] This smell [...] arises from the extrication of a very volatile metallic oxide; and, as this smell is one of its most distinguishing characters, I should on that account incline to call the metal Osmium.¹

The chemical symbol for osmium is Os.

¹Oxford English Dictionary, osmium, 3rd Edition, September 2009, Oxford University Press, accessed 2 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00334489. 

But I do disagree with him about the “fat royalty checks.” As the author of a reasonably well selling book on language, I can say with assurance that the checks aren’t so fat. It’s not a gig you do for the money. (Exception: Lynne Truss, whose execrable book was accompanied by an absolutely brilliant marketing campaign.)

These new elements have been named by their discoverers “Masurium,” after the Masurian Lake region, and “Rhenium,” after the Rhineland.¹

(Masurium is an early name for the element now known as technetium.)

The chemical symbol for rhenium is Re.

¹Oxford English Dictionary, rhenium, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 1 November 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50205903.

The element is sometimes, especially in older works, referred to by its German name, wolfram, from which its chemical symbol W comes. German use of wolfram dates to the 16th century, and its English use to at least 1757, when it is used in a translation of Henckel’s Pyritologia:

Though this tin ore be not easily separable from wolfram, a kind of mock-tin, or an irony tin mineral.

The origin of the word wolfram is unknown. It would seem likely that it is from a proper name, but this is not certain. Tradition has it that it is a compound of wolf (wolf) + rahm (cream). The second element could also be râm (soot). It is said to be the source of the modern Latin lupi spuma (wolf foam), described by Georgius Agricola in his 1546 De Natura Fossilium. But Agricola’s description of the mineral does not resemble wolfram, and the popular etymology of the German word may have arisen as an attempt to reconcile the two terms, rather than one coming from the other. And recorded use of wolfram in German is only from 1562, after the Latin term was coined.²

¹Oxford English Dictionary, tungsten, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 30 October 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50259771. 

²Oxford English Dictionary, wolfram, 2nd Edition, 1989, Oxford University Press, accessed 30 October 2009, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50286687. 

He very much reflects my opinion on the matter. While the loss of languages is a definite blow to linguistic research and understanding, socially its effects may actually be beneficial to the isolated speakers of the rare tongues that are dying. And besides, it is happening whether we like it or not and there seems to be very little we can do about it except record as much of the dying languages as we can before they are gone.

And then, comments on how the thesaurus is organized and how one can encounter some rare treasures in its pages:

Hat tip to the OUP Blog.

(Disclosure: Oxford University Press is the publisher of my book, Word Myths: Debunking Linguistic Urban Legends. Additionally, if you click through the links and make a purchase, I receive a very small referral payment from Amazon.com.)