Apostrophes -- A Challenge
Richard L. Brown
bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
will-o'-the-wisp.
I asked for more, but nobody contributed. Then I remembered "'tween,"
so I'm answering my own request, and at the same time re-issuing it,
this time as a challenge.
Doesn't anyone know of any more of these? Come on, I thought you
folks knew all about words!
I'm not interested in the common contractions, "she'll," "I'd," etc.
By far the most interesting thing about the original article was the
etymological note on "O'" in Irish names, which does _not_ stand for
"of," as I had once assumed.
Rich "Fo'c's'le is still my favorite." Brown
--
Richard L. Brown Office of Information Services
rbr...@ccmail.uwsa.edu University of Wisconsin System Administration
rlbr...@facstaff.wisc.edu 780 Regent St., Rm. 246 / Madison, WI 53715
Daan Sandee
|> I recently posted a list that included the following words:
|>
|> bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
|> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
|> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
|> will-o'-the-wisp.
|>
|> I asked for more, but nobody contributed. Then I remembered "'tween,"
|> so I'm answering my own request, and at the same time re-issuing it,
|> this time as a challenge.
Never saw the first one.
|> Doesn't anyone know of any more of these? Come on, I thought you
|> folks knew all about words!
With 'phone and 'plane goes 'bus. Much more interesting than 'copter.
Bo's'n is now commonly spelled bosun, otherwise you'd get bo's'n's mate,
which is more properly bosun's mate. But there is always coxs'n.
With fo'c's'le goes to'ga'nts and stu'n's'ls. Check your Hornblower.
I don't think I've ever seen sub' or mic'. It's an abbreviation, not an
elision.
Daan Sandee san...@think.com
Burlington, MA
David Casseres
> I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>
> bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
> will-o'-the-wisp.
"Bo's'n" and "fo'c's'le" are interesting. They're phonetic
representations of sailors' pronunciations of boatswain and forecastle,
but most sailors would *write* them with the full spellings -- just as
they would write "mainsail" even though they would always say "mains'l."
I think the spellings with all the apostrophes must have been invented by
writers who wanted to show readers how sailors talk. The same may be true
of "man-o'-war."
If "mic" is microphone, I think it's a misspelling. "Mike" is better.
Also, "phone," "plane," and "sub" are properly spelled without
apostrophes.
--
David Casseres
Exclaimer: Hey!
Peter Stewart Lively
as s'up, and 'chupto. Not to mention 'aint...
Truly Donovan
>I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>
>bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
>Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
>'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>will-o'-the-wisp.
>
>so I'm answering my own request, and at the same time re-issuing it,
>this time as a challenge.
>
>folks knew all about words!
>
'swonderful, 'smarvellous, to name a few.
Truly Donovan
Martin A. Mazur
rbr...@ccmail.uwsa.edu (Richard L. Brown) wrote:
>I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>
>bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
>Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
>'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>will-o'-the-wisp.
>
out. So he and his kids whipped up a disgusting sweet concoction, poured
individual servings on a cookie sheet, then baked them. They were supposed to
be some sort of confection, but after tasting them, my brother and his kids
decided to call them "n'mores".
--
Martin A. Mazur | 2nd Century thoughts on MTV:
The Applied Research Laboratory | "There is no public entertainment which
The Pennsylvania State University | does not inflict spiritual damage"
| - Tertullian
Matthew Rabuzzi
Richard L. Brown <rbr...@ccmail.uwsa.edu> writes:
: bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
: Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
: 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
:
: I'm not interested in the common contractions, "she'll," "I'd," etc.
'tis
'sblood (? I've actually only seen this as "splud", no apostrophe)
: By far the most interesting thing about the original article was the
: etymological note on "O'" in Irish names, which does _not_ stand for
: "of," as I had once assumed.
Do repost this, as it doesn't sound as if it ever got off your newsserver.
.........................................................
If perigee is the opposite of apogee, then merkin is synonymous with apowig
Matthew Rabuzzi
Benjamin D Lukoff
>What about heav'n, ne'er, 'twix, 'neath, o'er, and such colloquillisms
>as s'up, and 'chupto. Not to mention 'aint...
The apostrophe in "ain't" precedes the 't', not the 'a'.
If one wanted to spell the contraction of "what's up", would one spell it
as has been done above, or would it be "'sup"? I think I would use
"'sup", myself. Any opinions?
BDL
Rich Veraa
rab...@patch.tandem.com (Matthew Rabuzzi) wrote:
> 'tis
> 'sblood (? I've actually only seen this as "splud", no apostrophe)
'struth
GE/L/FA d-- H>+++ s g+ p? au00 a55 w+ v+@ C+++ US P? L 3- E? N+(+++) K W---
M-- !V po- Y++ t+@ 5--@ j@ R- G? tv-- b+++ P+ D@ B- e+++ u** h--(++) f+
r++(---)>+++ !n(+) y+>+++ Have you kissed your parrot today? 0
rve...@netside.net rve...@newssun.med.miami.edu ///{|}\\\
http://www.netside.net/~rveraa FIDONET (1:135/907) /|\
KJBlake
Hosie) writes:
>> I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>> bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
>> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
>> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>> will-o'-the-wisp.
>
> What are they all short for? I know some, but fewer than 1/4 so all is
a
>reasonable approximation.
bo's'n boatswain
cat-o'-nine-tails cat of nine tails
'copter helicopter
e'en even
e'er ever
fo'c's'le forecastle
'fore before
Hallowe'en all hallows evening
jack-o'-lantern ? Jack of lantern? Jack of the lantern?
ma'am madam
man-o'-war man of war
mic' ? I've never seen this. Perhaps microphone is
meant, but I've always seen
"mike."
o'clock of the clock
o'er over
'phone telephone
'plane airplane
'scope telescope, microscope, probably others
'sblood God's blood or His blood
'swounds God's wounds or His wounds
s'mores ? I've never seen this
sub' ? If this is meant to be submarine, I've never
seen it with an apostrophe
will-o'-the-wisp will of the wisp
Rich Veraa
blu...@u.washington.edu (Benjamin D Lukoff) wrote:
>>What about heav'n, ne'er, 'twix, 'neath, o'er, and such colloquillisms
>>as s'up, and 'chupto. Not to mention 'aint...
>The apostrophe in "ain't" precedes the 't', not the 'a'.
Might be a typo for 'tain't.
If not, 'tain't no big thing.
Cheers,
Rich
Richard L. Brown
>Richard L. Brown <rbr...@ccmail.uwsa.edu> writes:
[List of words with apostrophes... Thanks to all who responded!]
>Do repost this, as it doesn't sound as if it ever got off your newsserver.
Ok, here's the latter portion of the original article.
[List deleted once again]
The other major use of apostrophes, to represent possession, is beyond the scope
of this exercise, since the genitive case has long since become obsolete. But,
we must note that this usage too once represented elided letters. The genitive
case of "John" was "Johnes" and our friend the apostrophe now stands exclusively
in the stead of the missing "e". I would like to take this opportunity to curse
Sam Pepys for propagating the mistaken assumption that the apostrophe stood for
"his". Pepys wrote silly things like "the king his book" instead of "the king's
book" or "the kinges book". Damn you, and the diary you wrote in on, Pepys!
In another thread it was mentioned that Tennyson and his contemporaries used
constructions like "their's" and "her's". Did these pronouns in the genitive
case once have letters that are now elided? That is, did "theires" and "heres"
ever exist, in the way that "kinges" was the genetive case of "king"? Or are
these weirdly punctuated pronouns possibly a hypercorrect backformation?
Then there is the Dutch habit of forming _plurals_ from foreign words by adding
"'s". The Dutch name for the Hague has an apostrophe, too: "'s Gravenhage." I
don't know whether that represents elision, possession, or both -- or neither!
Definitely beyond the scope of this article. See alt.usage.nederlands I guess.
Where do we draw the line, especially when importing words from other languages?
I think that some of these squiggles don't even qualify as being apostrophes.
Chinese loan-words (using the old-style transcription) are full of them, notably
to distingish phonemes like "ch" and "ch'" but these are more like diacritical
marks than apostrophes. Similarly, Arabic words transcribed into English have
lots of these, e.g. the months of Dhu'l-Qadah, Dhu'l-Hijja, or Sha`ban. Wait a
minute! How did that backtick get in here? Beyond the pale! I think "Hawai'i"
also falls into this category. Is that a _real_ apostrophe, or a Sears
apostrophe? So, we just don't use it anymore.
Proper names like "D'Angelo" or "O'Hare" also have apostrophes, for related,
but slightly different reasons. The former is a contraction of "De Angelo",
meaning "of (the family) Angelo". The same function is served by the
apostrophe in a name like "O'Hare", but here it does _not_ represent the
English word "of".
Instead, the Irish word "O'" means "grandson" or "descendant". It's a variant
of an Indo-European root "awo-" meaning "an adult male relative other than one's
father". Related words are Latin _avus_, grandfather; _avunculus_, uncle; and
_avia_, grandmother, from which English gets such varied words as "atavism",
"avuncular", and "ayah", respectively. The circuitous route that "ayah" took
is interesting: Latin->Portuguese->Hindi->English!
Rich
Richard L. Brown
>
>Richard L. Brown:
>> I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>> bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
>> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
>> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>> will-o'-the-wisp.
>
> What are they all short for? I know some, but fewer than 1/4 so all is a
>reasonable approximation.
bo's'n -- Boatswain.
'bus -- Omnibus.
cat-o'-nine-tails -- [Reduced "of".]
'copter -- Helicopter.
e'en -- Two-in-one: the noun means "evening" and the adverb, "even".
e'er -- Ever.
fo'c's'le -- Forecastle. [My favorite.]
'fore -- Before. [Archaic.]
Hallowe'en -- All-hallows even.
jack-o'-lantern -- [Reduced "of"? Or a pun on Irish "O'?"
ma'am -- Contraction of "madam".
man-o'-war -- [Reduced "of".]
mic' -- "Microphone", pron. "mike".
o'clock -- Of the clock.
o'er -- Over.
'phone -- Usu. "telephone". If plural, could be "headphones" or "earphones".
'plane -- Airplane. [Brit. "aeroplane".]
'scope -- Telescope, microscope, oscilloscope.
s'mores -- "Some more" + "s". Choc'late and marshmallow melted on a Graham
cracker. [Is a Graham cracker the same thing as Brit. "digestive biscuit"?]
will-o'-the-wisp -- [Reduced "of" again.]
Rich Veraa
gum...@airdmhor.gen.nz (Simon Hosie) wrote:
>Richard L. Brown:
>> I recently posted a list that included the following words:
>> bo's'n, cat-o'-nine-tails, 'copter, e'en, e'er, fo'c's'le, 'fore,
>> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
>> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>> will-o'-the-wisp.
> What are they all short for? I know some, but fewer than 1/4 so all is a
>reasonable approximation.
boatswain, cat-of-nine-tails, helicopter, even, ever, forecastle, before,
All Hallows Eve(n), jack-of-the-lantern, madam, man-of-war, microphone,
of the clock, over, telephone, airplane, oscilloscope (or peri- or micro-
or stetho- or tele- or telescopic gunsight), by God's blood, by
God's wounds (those made by the nails [hooks] on the cross [also gadzooks
for God's hooks]), some mores, submarine, will-of-the-wisp.
Cheers,
Rich
Have you kissed your parrot today? 0
rve...@netside.net rve...@newssun.med.miami.edu ///{|}\\\
http://www.netside.net/~rveraa FIDONET (1:135/907) /|\
GE/L/FA H+>+++ g+ w+ v+@ C+++ OS/2 Y++ b+++ e+++ u** r++(---)>+++ y+>+++
Lee Burwasser
"some-mores," a campfire sweet made with graham crackers, chocolate bars,
and marshmellows.
--
Lee Burwasser lburw...@crs.loc.gov
Landover MD USA
*working stiff -- don't blame me for policy*
Matthew Rabuzzi
: Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
: 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
: [ 'sblood, 'struth ]
'Od rot! (more commonly "drat!" today)
i'faith (Scots: "i'fegs", or "fegs" plain and simple)
(Not an apostrophe, but a lament -- and another Scots expression
I stumbled onto recently -- is "waesucks" or "waesuck", from
"woe + sakes", a wail of grief or pity.)
.........................................................
Mary Magdalene -- the odah of sanctity
Matthew Rabuzzi
ALAN LLOYD
>
> Hallowe'en, jack-o'-lantern, ma'am, man-o'-war, mic', o'clock, o'er,
> 'phone, 'plane, 'scope, 'sblood, 'swounds, s'mores, sub',
>
> I asked for more, but nobody contributed. Then I remembered "'tween,"
> so I'm answering my own request, and at the same time re-issuing it,
> this time as a challenge.
>
> Doesn't anyone know of any more of these? Come on, I thought you
> folks knew all about words!
>
>
> etymological note on "O'" in Irish names, which does _not_ stand for
> "of," as I had once assumed.
>
> Richard L. Brown Office of Information Services
> rbr...@ccmail.uwsa.edu University of Wisconsin System Administration
> rlbr...@facstaff.wisc.edu 780 Regent St., Rm. 246 / Madison, WI 53715
>
If you have " 'tween ", you also have " 'twixt " = betwixt.
ALAN LLOYD
And there is "ne'er-do-well" = never-do-well = good-for-nothing.
This apparently is Scottish. Are there any common themes?
Obviously there is a nautical one with some of your favourites.
Michael Tobis
fragment that LACKS the semantic content etymologically.
The paradigm is 'hood (for neighborhood). Also diss (for disrespect).
There's also 'droid, 'warez and 'puter in tech weenie dialect.
Alternatively, taking on the elaborate character of cockney rhyming
slang there's 'fuser (for computer by way of confuser). I noticed this
trend while waiting for an elevator. The kid waiting with me mutterred
something about a slow 'vator.
:waves at Rich, grinning foolishly
mt
Matthew Rabuzzi
Michael Tobis <to...@skool.ssec.wisc.edu> writes:
: I've noticed a recent trend to shorten words keeping a
I dunno how recent this is; OTOH, the only similar aphaereses I can
recall from college 15-20 years ago are "za" (pizza), specifically
"roni za", "chovy za", or "shroom za" (pepperoni, anchovy, or mushroom),
and on a couple of special weekends simply going "shrooming".
.........................................................
Matthew Rabuzzi & Jon Bon Chovi
Anno Siegel
Matthew Rabuzzi <rab...@patch.tandem.com> wrote:
>
>Michael Tobis <to...@skool.ssec.wisc.edu> writes:
>: I've noticed a recent trend to shorten words keeping a
>: fragment that LACKS the semantic content etymologically.
>:
>: The paradigm is 'hood (for neighborhood). Also diss (for disrespect).
[...]
>I dunno how recent this is; OTOH, the only similar aphaereses I can
>recall from college 15-20 years ago are "za" (pizza), specifically
>"roni za", "chovy za", or "shroom za" (pepperoni, anchovy, or mushroom),
>and on a couple of special weekends simply going "shrooming".
US army slang had 'gator for alligator and 'peas for MPs during the
mid sixties.
Anno
Mike Pearce
*'moff'*
I have heard this used by rock climbers who, finding themselves in
extremis, are about to succumb to the force of gravity and fall off.
It is a shortened form of 'I'm off' and is used to attract the
attention of the person holding the rope to make sure they are
concentrating.
I have also heard the delightful 'moff yoff' meaning *I'm off youth*.
The term 'youth' being a fairly common form of address in Northern
England.
Mike Pearce
Steve Bacher
>I've noticed a recent trend to shorten words keeping a
>fragment that LACKS the semantic content etymologically.
>The paradigm is 'hood (for neighborhood). Also diss (for disrespect).
>There's also 'droid, 'warez and 'puter in tech weenie dialect.
[etc.]
A much older instance of this is "bus", shortened from "omnibus".
If you're familiar with Latin, you can appreciate the deep lack of
semantic content therein.
- seb
Lee Ellis
Siegel) wrote:
>In alt.usage.english article <4kep13$s...@gazette.loc3.tandem.com>,
>Matthew Rabuzzi <rab...@patch.tandem.com> wrote:
>>
>>Michael Tobis <to...@skool.ssec.wisc.edu> writes:
>>: I've noticed a recent trend to shorten words keeping a
>>: fragment that LACKS the semantic content etymologically.
>>:
>>: The paradigm is 'hood (for neighborhood). Also diss (for disrespect).
>
>[...]
>
>>I dunno how recent this is; OTOH, the only similar aphaereses I can
>>recall from college 15-20 years ago are "za" (pizza), specifically
>>"roni za", "chovy za", or "shroom za" (pepperoni, anchovy, or mushroom),
>>and on a couple of special weekends simply going "shrooming".
>
>US army slang had 'gator for alligator and 'peas for MPs during the
>mid sixties.
>
>Anno
And don't forget phone for telephone and fax for facsimile.
Lee
Lee Ellis, Editor
Sharlee Publications
David Stewart
of words from the front seems to be very much an American street slang
phenomenon and, as such, is set rapidly to become a feature of street
slang over here. You can imagine my incomprehension when in a New York
bar last year, I was asked for directions to the 'throom. I had to get a
friend to translate!
>>Steven goat Bodzin>>
cazh for casual. Indeed, when DO abbreviations keep semantic content?
John Lawler
>nor should one forget '40's slang: natch for naturally, or somewhat later,
>cazh for casual. Indeed, when DO abbreviations keep semantic content?
The question is a bit difficult to understand, but my mystification
is no doubt due to having missed the beginning of the thread
(news machine problems locally, not restricted to a.u.e).
The question seems to be how "semantic content" is interpreted,
and how it is divisible among the parts of a word.
There isn't any such thing as "content", of course; words aren't
hollow, and they don't have pockets, so there's no place for
anything semantic to be "contained" (putting aside the question
of how "semantic" is to be interpreted here). The use of words
like "content" with regard to lexical meaning is a feature of
the Conduit Metaphor (see the classic study by Michael J. Reddy:
"The Conduit Metaphor - a Case of Frame Conflict in our Language
About Language", in _Metaphor and Thought_, edited by Andrew Ortony,
Cambridge University Press 1979, pp 284-324; and also the initial
chapters of _Metaphors We Live By_, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson,
University of Chicago Press 1980, for further discussion of the Conduit
Metaphor and its seductive mythology).
But if we reframe the question in terms of "conventional meaning"
or some such, the problem of divisibility remains. For compound
words like "blackbird" or "babysitter", one can associate parts
of the word with individual significance without too much trouble.
And if they get apostrophized -- which, note, happens *first* in
the speech and *later* (if at all) in writing, so we're talking
about real language use here, not orthography -- we can speak
with some confidence about the respective meanings of the
remnant and the deleted material. For instance, "sitter" is
widely used as a synonym for "babysitter" in the U.S.; "baby"
is not. It seems pretty obvious to me why this would be the case.
And neither "black" nor "bird" is used to my knowledge as a
synonym for "blackbird" (though in local specialized contexts
like ornithology stations all bets are off), and this is also
not surprising, given contrasts with "black" and "bird" that
this would interfere with.
But which part of "alligator" has the meaning? "Alli" is
an unlikely truncation, because it ends in the wrong kind
of vowel; but "gator" is fine, and common. But compare the
case of "crocodile" -- "croc" is a common truncation, but
I've never encountered "dile" or "odile" in this sense.
Which part gets truncated depends, I suspect, *far* more
on the phonology of the word and of the prospective abbreviated
form, than on any semantic criteria. There's nothing wrong
with chopping off the beginning of the word, or the end.
Cases of both abound: (omni)bus, (taxi)(cab) [synonymous],
auto(mobile), (bi/motor/tri)cycle [ambiguous out of context].
Note that these are sort of compounds, using Latin and Greek
morphemes instead of English. Most English words that are
long enough to make contraction desirable are formed from
such roots, and truncation sometimes works on that basis.
But sometimes not, because of the phonology of English. My
favorite example of this is the abbreviations of the modern
English word "helicopter", a conscious creation on the basis
of the Greek roots "helico-" ('spiral', the root also of "helix")
and "pter" ('wing', as in "pterodactyl" or 'wing-finger'; this
root is cognate to English "feather" through Grimm's Law: p <-> f,
t <-> th, as in "pater" and "father"). But in fact the
word is not broken along the root boundaries.
The normal abbreviations of "helicopter" are "heli-" (usually a
combining term, as in "helipad") and "copter", which is frequently
used as a free noun. These are both innovations, but they fit
the word structure of English and that's good enough.
So, to answer the question, neither part holds the semantic "content".
But some parts *sound* better than others; semantics is in the
ear of the beholder.
- John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/ling/jlawler/ U Michigan Linguistics
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a - Edward Sapir
mountainous and anonymous work of unconscious generations." Language (1921)
Bob Cunningham
[...]
>The normal abbreviations of "helicopter" are "heli-"
I've often heard a helicopter informally called a helo,
pronounced "HEE low".
---
Bob Cunningham, | "Short words are best and the old words
Los Angeles, | when short are best of all."
California, USA | -- Winston Churchill
Bob Cunningham
>>>Steven goat Bodzin>> <s...@sirius.com> writes:
>
>>nor should one forget '40's slang: natch for naturally, or somewhat later,
>>cazh for casual. Indeed, when DO abbreviations keep semantic content?
[...]
>The question seems to be how "semantic content" is interpreted,
>and how it is divisible among the parts of a word.
>
>There isn't any such thing as "content", of course; words aren't
>hollow, and they don't have pockets, so there's no place for
>anything semantic to be "contained" (putting aside the question
>of how "semantic" is to be interpreted here).
On the face of it, that remark sounds totally wrong, but it may
be only mostly wrong in the sense that it only applies to the jargon
of some linguists. In ordinary standard English, words certainly do
have semantic content. This can be seen by consulting a good
dictionary, where it will be seen that in one sense "content" is
synonymous with "meaning" or "significance" (Merriam-Webster's
Collegiate Dictionary Tenth Edition_ (MWCD10)).
_The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary_ (1993) (NSOED/93) has
one pertinent example of the use of "content": "W. D. Whitney, The
inner content or meaning of words".
Apparently "content" can be used even in a linguistics
environment to refer to the lexical meaning of a word, as shown by the
following NSOED/93 entry:
"Comb. 'content word', a word having an independent
lexical meaning (as a noun, adjective, verb, etc.)
as opp[osed] to one expressing primarily a
grammatical relationship (as a preposition,
conjunction, auxiliary, etc.)"
Even more to the point, _Random House Webster's College Dictionary_
defines "content word" using the very words "semantic content":
"content word, a word, typically a noun, verb,
adjective, or adverb, that carries semantic
content, bearing reference to the world
independently of its use within a particular
sentence (disting[uished] from 'function
word')."
>The use of words
>like "content" with regard to lexical meaning is a feature of
>the Conduit Metaphor (see the classic study by Michael J. Reddy:
>"The Conduit Metaphor - a Case of Frame Conflict in our Language
> About Language", in _Metaphor and Thought_, edited by Andrew Ortony,
> Cambridge University Press 1979, pp 284-324; and also the initial
>chapters of _Metaphors We Live By_, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson,
>University of Chicago Press 1980, for further discussion of the Conduit
>Metaphor and its seductive mythology).
>
That all sounds quite impressive, but if these works teach that
words don't have semantic content, they may just be the sterile drivel
of authors whose solitary meditations have carried them too far from
reality.
(Posted; e-mailed to s...@sirius.com and
jla...@snoopy.ling.lsa.umich.edu)
---
Bob Cunningham, | "Allow me to define 'fish' and I will
Los Angeles, | prove to you that a whale is a fish."
California, USA | -- Who?
Mark Israel
> The question seems to be how "semantic content" is interpreted,
> and how it is divisible among the parts of a word.
>
> There isn't any such thing as "content", of course; words aren't
> hollow, and they don't have pockets, so there's no place for
> anything semantic to be "contained" (putting aside the question
> of how "semantic" is to be interpreted here). The use of words
> like "content" with regard to lexical meaning is a feature of
> the Conduit Metaphor (see the classic study by Michael J. Reddy:
> "The Conduit Metaphor - a Case of Frame Conflict in our Language
> About Language", in _Metaphor and Thought_, edited by Andrew Ortony,
> Cambridge University Press 1979, pp 284-324; and also the initial
> chapters of _Metaphors We Live By_, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson,
> University of Chicago Press 1980, for further discussion of the Conduit
> Metaphor and its seductive mythology).
In article <3177b636...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, exw...@ix.netcom.com (Bob Cunningham) writes:
[quoting John's "There isn't any such thing as 'content'..."]
> On the face of it, that remark sounds totally wrong, but it may
> be only mostly wrong in the sense that it only applies to the jargon
> of some linguists. In ordinary standard English, words certainly do
> have semantic content. This can be seen by consulting a good
> dictionary, where it will be seen that in one sense "content" is
> synonymous with "meaning" or "significance" (Merriam-Webster's
> Collegiate Dictionary Tenth Edition_ (MWCD10)).
Bob is not interpreting John's words sympathetically.
John is not denying that "content" is used to mean "meaning".
Bob's good dictionaries merely confirm "the use of words like
'content' with regard to lexical meaning", to which John refers.
John's point is that the coexistence of the term "semantic
content" with *other* senses of the word "content" may encourage
people to reach what John considers to be non-optimal conclusions
about language -- just as the coexistence of the term "centrifugal
force" with another meaning of "force" causes some people to draw
incorrect conclusions about physics.
John is a professional linguist, and Bob (unlike me) purports to
respect the judgement of professional linguists in language matters.
When, then, when John makes a remark that "sounds totally wrong" to
Bob, does Bob not make a greater effort to understand the remark,
instead of jumping to his dictionaries to try to refute it?
--
mis...@scripps.edu Mark Israel
Lee Rudolph
>jla...@snoopy.ling.lsa.umich.edu (John Lawler) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>The normal abbreviations of "helicopter" are "heli-"
>
> I've often heard a helicopter informally called a helo,
>pronounced "HEE low".
Now, I've certainly often heard the word "helicopter" accented
and revoweled so as to come out "HEEl@copter". I wonder if
"HEE low" is an abbreviation of that pronunciation, and, if so,
whether John or some other professional can explain why the
schwa got unschwaed.
Lee Rudolph
Richard Badger
I think the point about the term 'semantic content' is that it is a
metaphor, which assumes that words are containers and that meaning is
a substance which can be put in these containers. This is a very well
established metaphor in English and most people do not notice that it is
being used. One of the consequences is that people think of words having
a fixed meaning rather than a meaning which is open to interpretation.
The metaphor may or may not reflect reality but it seems useful to be
aware of the metaphor and how it influences you.