No such word as "sacrify"?

[Django Cat]

Well, my initial thought is "oh yes there is such a word as 'sacrify', I've been using it most of my life", and that's one I may be going to stick with. But a student using it in an assignment reveals Word redlining, while a quick Google throws up a number of "if it ain't in the dictionary, it ain't a word" type discussions... but not, interestingly, on AUE or AEU... and I suppose using 'sacrifice' as a verb sounds maybe more formal... so I've changed what the student wrote from:

"which encourages companies to sacrify the long-term welfare…"
to
"which encourages companies to sacrifice the long-term welfare…"

Your thoughts, up to and including that I am thus showing myself up as a complete ignoramus again are, as ever, cherished.

This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?

DC

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/27/13 5:15 AM, Django Cat wrote:
> Well, my initial thought is "oh yes there is such a word as 'sacrify', I've been using it most of my life", and that's one I may be going to stick with.

I've never heard it or seen it that I remember. When I saw it in your
subject line, I thought it was a typo for "scarify". However, it's in
the OED, marked "Obs.", with the latest hit (which is for an
intransitive sense) being 1555.

> But a student using it in an assignment reveals Word redlining, while a quick Google throws up a number of "if it ain't in the dictionary, it ain't a word" type discussions... but not, interestingly, on AUE or AEU... and I suppose using 'sacrifice' as a verb sounds maybe more formal... so I've changed what the student wrote from:
>
> "which encourages companies to sacrify the long-term welfare…"
> to
> "which encourages companies to sacrifice the long-term welfare…"
>
> Your thoughts, up to and including that I am thus showing myself up as a complete ignoramus again are, as ever, cherished.

Maybe you're showing yourself up as a time traveler. But I'd have made
the same correction you did.

> This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the previous one.

It finally pushed me through the considerable frustrations of learning
to use Thunderbird.

If you have to use GG, it's helpful to put in carriage returns at the
end of every line.

> Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?

Sorry, no idea.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/27/13 5:31 AM, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On 7/27/13 5:15 AM, Django Cat wrote:
>> Well, my initial thought is "oh yes there is such a word as 'sacrify',
>> I've been using it most of my life", and that's one I may be going to
>> stick with.
>
> I've never heard it or seen it that I remember. When I saw it in your
> subject line, I thought it was a typo for "scarify". However, it's in
> the OED, marked "Obs.", with the latest hit (which is for an
> intransitive sense) being 1555.

...

Oops. The latest hit is in your sense, from /The Faerie Queen/ (1590).

--
Jerry Friedman

[musika]

On 27/07/2013 12:15, Django Cat wrote:
>
> This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?
>

I use Newstap on an iPad. Not sure how useful it is on an iPhone. There
is a Newstap lite (sic) if you want to try it.


--
Ray
UK

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:15:16 -0700 (PDT), Django Cat
<vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Well, my initial thought is "oh yes there is such a word as 'sacrify', I've been using it most of my life", and that's one I may be going to stick with. But a student using it in an assignment reveals Word redlining, while a quick Google throws up a number of "if it ain't in the dictionary, it ain't a word" type discussions... but
not, interestingly, on AUE or AEU... and I suppose using 'sacrifice' as a verb sounds maybe more formal... so I've changed what the student wrote from:
>
>"which encourages companies to sacrify the long-term welfare…"
>to
>"which encourages companies to sacrifice the long-term welfare…"
>
>Your thoughts, up to and including that I am thus showing myself up as a complete ignoramus again are, as ever, cherished.

My first thought was that "sacrify", which I've not met before, would
mean "to make sacred".

My second thought was that the student had originally misheard
"sacrifice" as "sacrify" and then stuck with it.

The OED knows "sacrify" in various senses. It is marked as obsolete.

1. trans. To offer as a sacrifice.

1390 J. Gower Confessio Amantis III. 336 And forth unto the
temple he com.., Hise yiftes forto sacrifie.
....
1490 Caxton tr. Eneydos xxiv. 87 Alwayes she doubted her self in
noo wyse, that her suster wolde..sacryfye hir self with
funerailles mortalle, by fyre horrible.

2. intr. To offer sacrifice.

a1325 Prose Psalter liii[i]. 6 Y shal sacrifye to þe wyþ gode
wylle.
....
1555 W. Waterman tr. J. Boemus Fardle of Facions i. v. 52 That
there might be none occasion of filthinesse, when they shold
ministre or sacrifie.

3. trans. To offer sacrifice to.

1474 Caxton tr. Game & Playe of Chesse (1883) iii. v. 124 As he
sacrefyed his goddes he receyuyd lettres from the senate of rome.
a1492 Caxton tr. Vitas Patrum (1495) i. lv. f. cxi/1, [He] was
broughte..in to a temple of ydolatrye..for to adoure and sacrefye
the ydolles.

4. nonce-use. To consecrate.

1827 W. Tennant Papistry Storm'd 167 Whan the great Kirk was
sacrify'd.

>
>This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?
>
>DC

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Whiskers]

On 2013-07-27, Peter Duncanson [BrE] <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:15:16 -0700 (PDT), Django Cat
> <vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:

[...]

> My first thought was that "sacrify", which I've not met before, would
> mean "to make sacred".

That was my reaction, and I'm sure I've *thought* it in that sense, even if
I've never read it or written it.

> My second thought was that the student had originally misheard
> "sacrifice" as "sacrify" and then stuck with it.

That looks like the explanation in that case.

> The OED knows "sacrify" in various senses. It is marked as obsolete.

[...]

> 4. nonce-use. To consecrate.
>
> 1827 W. Tennant Papistry Storm'd 167 Whan the great Kirk was
> sacrify'd.

[...]

I think that a nonce-use is nevertheless a use - and if such a usage occurs
more than once, as it seems it does for at least two people here, then it
is no longer a nonce-use, is it?

Perhaps some future revision of the OED will use this thread as a reason to
elevate the 'consecrate' meaning to a real definition.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Whiskers]

On 2013-07-27, Django Cat <vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:

[...]

> This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the
> previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?
>
> DC

Are you using a normal computer of your own (ie not in a library or
cyber-cafe) to get to Google Groups in a web browser? If so, there are
many newsreaders (usenet clients) to choose from, depending on your
operating system.

"Thunderbird" <http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird> is popular and
available, free of charge, for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X (it's mainly an
email client, but it can handle usenet too albeit with some limitations -
but far better than Google Groups!).

"Claws Mail" <http://www.claws-mail.org/> is (in my opinion) better
equipped, but there isn't a Mac OS X version (there is one for Maemo
tablets, though!).

"Xnews" <http://xnews.newsguy.com/> is an excellent usenet-only program,
also free of charge, but only available for Windows.

"slrn" <http://www.slrn.org/> is what I use, on Linux - powerful, text
interface only. Can be made to work on Windows or Mac OS X, I believe.

I don't use an iPhone. Android devices have a few usenet clients in Google
'Play' but I haven't tried any lately.

The newsgroup news.software.readers is the place to find real advice on
this topic.

[Django Cat]

On Saturday, July 27, 2013 4:32:58 PM UTC+1, Whiskers Catwheezel wrote:
> On 2013-07-27, Django Cat

>
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>
> > This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the
>
> > previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?
>
> >
>
> > DC
>
>
>
> Are you using a normal computer of your own (ie not in a library or
>
> cyber-cafe) to get to Google Groups in a web browser? If so, there are
>
> many newsreaders (usenet clients) to choose from, depending on your
>
> operating system.
>

Yes I am, but the reason I sometimes have to use Google Groups is that I travel a lot, so often don't have access to a usenet server via the ISP I use at home. In fact when I'm at home I use the XanaNews reader, which I'm reasonably happy with. I've previously used Agent - there'll have been a reason I changed to XanaNews but it eludes me at the moment. I know there are paid-for usenet servers I could sign up for, but I'm not that bothered to do so... anyway, thanks for the advice!

DC

[Django Cat]

Downloaded and set up, though of course I still don't have access to a usenet server away from home.

The more I think of this, of course there's no such bloody word as 'sacrify'. Too much time reading non-native English speaker student assignments....

DC

[musika]

Eternal September is free and works fine. I use it instead of VM.

--
Ray
UK

[John Briggs]

On 27/07/2013 20:47, Django Cat wrote:

It's a confusion of "sacrifice", "sanctify" and "scarify". It's a bit
like "irregardless".
--
John Briggs

[Mike L]

On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:15:16 -0700 (PDT), Django Cat
<vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:

What ho, Viv!

No, you still fail to qualify as an ignoramus, or even a mumpsimus:
your rep for expertise is unsullied. OED does have that lovely word
"sacrify", but marks it obsolete since the 16th C. Apart from a
nonce-use in the 19th.

--
Mike.

[Whiskers]

On 2013-07-27, Django Cat <vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:

> On Saturday, July 27, 2013 4:32:58 PM UTC+1, Whiskers Catwheezel wrote:
>> On 2013-07-27, Django Cat
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > This latest Google gropes incarnation is even more horrible than the
>> > previous one. Any way to get usenet on an iPhone?
>>

>> Are you using a normal computer of your own (ie not in a library or
>> cyber-cafe) to get to Google Groups in a web browser? If so, there are
>> many newsreaders (usenet clients) to choose from, depending on your
>> operating system.
>
> Yes I am, but the reason I sometimes have to use Google Groups is that I
> travel a lot, so often don't have access to a usenet server via the ISP I
> use at home. In fact when I'm at home I use the XanaNews reader, which
> I'm reasonably happy with. I've previously used Agent - there'll have
> been a reason I changed to XanaNews but it eludes me at the moment. I
> know there are paid-for usenet servers I could sign up for, but I'm not
> that bothered to do so... anyway, thanks for the advice!

If your ISP's news-server can't be reached from other ISPs, there are
free-to-use news-servers that are adequate for occasional reading and
posting to text-only newsgroups. They are occasionally mentioned in
alt.free.newsservers. <http://www.eternal-september.org/> seems to be
pretty reliable; <http://aioe.org/> doesn't even require 'registration' but
has other quirks too.

[Nick Spalding]

Whiskers wrote, in
<slrnkv8bqa.c...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>
on Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:36:26 +0100:

Those other quirks including the fact that it misses a lot of messages.
In this group over the last 28 days it has only delivered 77% as many as
eternal-september.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE

[Leslie Danks]

When AUE is in posting frenzy, that might be regarded as a feature by
some...

--
Les (BrE)
Frankly, my dear, I don't give a dime.

[Mike L]

On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 22:59:43 +0200, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>
wrote:

>Nick Spalding wrote:
>
>> Whiskers wrote, in
>> <slrnkv8bqa.c...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>
>> on Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:36:26 +0100:

[...]

>>
>> Those other quirks including the fact that it misses a lot of messages.
>> In this group over the last 28 days it has only delivered 77% as many as
>> eternal-september.
>
>When AUE is in posting frenzy, that might be regarded as a feature by
>some...

Especially when the puns get too traumatic.
[.sig.]

>Frankly, my dear, I don't give a dime.

There is nothing like a dime.

--
Mike.

[Leslie Danks]

Especially when one's a-dozin.

--
Les (BrE)

[Tony Cooper]

Watch it. Threads like this can turn on a dime.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

[Harvey]

Django Cat <vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> Wrote in message:

> Well, my initial thought is "oh yes there is such a word as 'sacrify', I've been using it most of my life", and that's one I may be going to stick with. But a student using it in an assignment reveals Word redlining, while a quick Google throws up a number of "if it ain't in the dictionary, it ain't a word" type discussions... but not, interestingly, on AUE or AEU..

I'm not familiar with the word, but for what it's worth, when I
saw the subject line I assumed it had to do with sacred-ness (as
in sacristy).

Cheers,
Harvey


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://www.piaohong.tk/newsgroup

[R H Draney]

Harvey filted:

>
>I'm not familiar with the word, but for what it's worth, when I
> saw the subject line I assumed it had to do with sacred-ness (as
> in sacristy).

As did I...I assumed that whoever perpetrated it was unfamiliar with the word
"sanctify"....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[abc]

Whiskers wrote:
> On 2013-07-27, Peter Duncanson [BrE]<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:15:16 -0700 (PDT), Django Cat
>> <vivmi...@fmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> My first thought was that "sacrify", which I've not met before, would
>> mean "to make sacred".
>
> That was my reaction, and I'm sure I've *thought* it in that sense, even if
> I've never read it or written it.

Me too.

> I think that a nonce-use is nevertheless a use - and if such a usage occurs
> more than once, as it seems it does for at least two people here, then it
> is no longer a nonce-use, is it?

Make that three.

> Perhaps some future revision of the OED will use this thread as a reason to
> elevate the 'consecrate' meaning to a real definition.

Which reminds me of the saying about half the village fools on your side
being majority enough.

abc

[keevin...@gmail.com]

The word was used by Churchill in a telegram to France when it capitulated to Germany.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2020-03-18 17:28:00 +0000, keevin...@gmail.com said:

> The word was used by Churchill in a telegram to France when it
> capitulated to Germany.

and so? Have you never used an inappropriate word?

In any case, what is your point about English usage?

--
athel

[Nathan Tout]

On 18/03/2020 17:28, keevin...@gmail.com wrote:
> The word was used by Churchill in a telegram to France when it capitulated to Germany.
>

He was probably hammered again. We don't all idolise him here.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

The word does exist. It is in the OED but is marked as obsolete.

sacrify, v.

Etymology: < Old French sacrifi-er (12th cent.), < Latin
sacrificare, < sacrificus : see sacrific adj.1
Obsolete.

1. transitive. To offer as a sacrifice.

1390 J. Gower Confessio Amantis III. 336 And forth unto the
temple he com.., Hise yiftes forto sacrifie.
....

1490 W. Caxton tr. Eneydos xxiv. 87 Alwayes she doubted her self

in noo wyse, that her suster wolde..sacryfye hir self with
funerailles mortalle, by fyre horrible.

2. intransitive. To offer sacrifice

a1325 Prose Psalter liii[i]. 6 Y shal sacrifye to þe wyþ gode
wylle.
....
1555 W. Waterman tr. J. Boemus Fardle of Facions i. v. 52 That
there might be none occasion of filthinesse, when they shold
ministre or sacrifie.