Editor for this issue: <>
This doesn't quite qualify, but 'overlook' means the opposite of 'look over': "My accountant looked over my records but overlooked a deduction..." --- University of California Riverside, CA 92521Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In regard to Sue Morrish's (does the apostrophe go there? looks awful) on SHAME. I don't know what the connection is, if any (which I doubt), but this is also absolutely stereotypical South African usage, normally prefixed by 'ag' /ax/ = 'oh'. When you see something in the general order of a kitten, a new baby, or anything that is between cute and hyper-cute, you say s g h a a m e This is very crudely iconic: the fall is a big one, in some speakers (especially female) at a rough guess a glissando down about a pure 5th, sometimes descending way below tessutura into creak or breathiness. There is of course also 'shame' (normally without 'ag') for things that are a shame: here there's less of a fall, in fact often normal citation contour, used where most other varieties of English use the word, and where the preamble 'what a ---' is available, as of an injury, divorce, or other catastrophe. This may be of no theoretical interest, but we do need data on English, which I am beginning to think is not a very well known language. Roger Lass Department of Linguistics University of Cape TownMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Hi Sue Morrish quotes examples from Australian Aboriginal English where "shame" is used to denote something quite opposite to its standard English meaning. May I direct your attention to the fact that we speakers of Germanic languages do not have to go that far afield to find similar examples? The German word "schamlos" (=shameless) denotes exactly the same state as the Aboriginal English expression "without shame". I take both forms as meaning "not knowing the apprpriate rules of conduct within your community", these rules being legal, religious or other. There is a German verb "sich schaemen", approx "to shame oneself". It means that you know that you have violated those rules, which appear to be universal to human society, regarding that both the rules and their violation are expressed in such ways linguistiucally in remote parts of the globe. Achim StenzelMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Just a note on Benji Wald's invocation of Varro. The technique of etynology by opposites was very popular, even standard, in the Middle Ages; just to get the Latin straight, I think it's lucus a non lucendo in the usual usage. Isidore of Seville used the technique, and it comes up in all sorts of contexts: two famous ones are war is called bellum quasi non bellum (called bellum 'beautiful' because it's ugly) St Cecilia is supposed to have got her name in the formula Caecilia quasi caecitate carens 'Caecilia because lacking (carens) in blindness (caecitas, ablative sg caecitate governed by a caritive verb). I don't have my Chaucer in front of me, but I recall dimly that somewhere in the Canterbury Tales is a passage about St Cecilia that makes a play on sight and blindness in this way. Roger Lass/University of Cape TownMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I have not been able to follow the discussion on this subject, so excuse me if my offering is redundant. But from experience, I know of two words that have caused problems in casual discussions. One was the word RENT. When one of my friends said that he was going to rent his house, I was confused. I thought he owned his house. It took some time to uncover the fact that he was he was going to "rent out" his house for the winter to someone else. This is an example of a relational antonym in which the same word indicates both sides of a relationship. The word LEARN,I believe, once had the same potential, and, in fact, is still used in some dialects to mean both "teach" and "learn." Another word that caused me some problem was SANCTION, which can indicate either general approval or general condemnation. Check senses 1 and 7 in the American Heritage Dictionary. Other words that caused me some surprise were the words COMPENDIOUS and COMPENDIUM. I had always used these words to indicate a large authoritative volume, a tome. I was shocked to find that the dictionary (American Heritage) defines compendium thus: "a short, complete summary." It defines compendious: "Containing or stating briefly and concisely all the essentials; succinct." In disbelief, I asked ten college professors in several academic areas what the word meant. All agreed that it meant something large and authoritative. Are there others out there who believe as we did, before we were disabused. And, if the contrasting meaning is pervasive, should it be included as another sense of the word? Just asking.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue