Stella_Omega
No Gentleman
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Posts
- 39,700
I will always treasure Terry Pratchett's use of that word; an elderly lady incensed at her friend's bloomers (under her skirt, mind you); "Nanny standing here all bifurcated."
What words do you hate to hear/see misused?
- Thread starter monoblanco
- Start date
I will always treasure Terry Pratchett's use of that word; an elderly lady incensed at her friend's bloomers (under her skirt, mind you); "Nanny standing here all bifurcated."
Tio_Narratore
Studies
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Posts
- 71,015
You seem to be taking yourself much more seriously than I'm taking myself, Pilot. If you didn't notice, I declared my "objection" to be arcane and academic; my "lividity" at the usage was merely an opportunity to play on the word.
It remains, though, that Webster's recorded usage is the form agreed upon in the CMS, and I follow that when I'm writing professionally. But do realize that if everyone turned to using dilatate when dilate would have done, then Webster's would record it, and it would become the agreed-on usage. Wait a second - Webster's has already recorded that. It is the common medical usage, no matter how silly or incorrect. If Webster or anyone else's present record is the final word, then it does, in fact, have the final word, since no new words could ever be used. And my comment was not about Webster's being an arbiter of usage, but an arbiter of truth. I assure you, it isn't the final word in truth.
My only real objection to "liver spots," by the way, is the conclusion that they are somehow caused by the liver. And the same goes for the belief that the "Caucasian Race" (Europeans) originated in the Caucasus Mountains. They have that name solely because Blumenbach, in 1803, named them after the region from which his type specimen came. We would certainly be remiss if we allowed the accidents of naming to determine reality. If we did, then, given that my name means "rich friend," I'd not have to write anything at all to cover my expenses.
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,870
This was your statement. It doesn't matter in the least what Noah Webster intended his dictionary to be. You were leaving the impression that the Merriam-Webster dictionaries I cited aren't arbiters--presumably because of what Noah Webster intended--when they jolly well are arbiters of spelling (and compounding and word usage) in the U.S. market.
You are backpeddling now; I'm not going to, because this is an important point for published writers-to-be to understand about the publishing world. If they've permitted themselves to be misled, they are going to suffer for it.
("Webster's" just denotes a style of dictionary anyway, not a company descending from Noah Webster's effort.)
Tio_Narratore
Studies
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Posts
- 71,015
No "backpeddling" [sic], Pilot; I never meant to be serious about liver spots. All skin discolourations used to be called "livors;" the notion, and name, of "liver" spots as discolourations due to the liver only appears in the 1880s as far as I can find. My point about dictionaries, whether descendants of Noah or the OED, stands: they are descriptive, not prescriptive. Editors may use them prescriptively, but the dictionaries themselves reflect usage, not "correctness." New words get added to the dictionaries on the basis of usage, not on the wisdom or divine inspiration of the editors (OK, well maybe l'Academie francaise is divinely inspired when it comes to the faith and morals of words).
And, then, I'm afraid I don't really care if Webster likes my "simultumultuous orgasm;" I like it. Writers, amateur or not, do like to play with words, and they don't take the dictionary as the limits. But, you know, if enough people like my little phrase and use it, it will end up in some future edition of Webster's.
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 41,955
The one thing no one will ever get over is your arrogance Pilot.
I am sick and tired of your "amateur" author remarks. First off if the site appalls you that much then do everyone a huge favor and get of of it. I mean it must be terrible to deal with us every day
Second you're write here posting on this site to so...I know you are but what are we?
And once more-and no worries people I won;t go off with more links and nuumbers0- I have seen nothing from you that shows me you're than anyone else above any of us here that are publishing. You're no less an amateur than anyone else. In fact you're not even as successful as many here.
You are now arguing with someone that in my time here I have never seen utter a bad word towards anyone and never be snarky
Life existed before Webster and the CMS. What is true for modern is not all that ever existed.
Google/Wiki and even the dictionary is as good as the information put into it by people and those people choose to enter and they are not going into the "wayback machine" to do so.
Tio says he is a scholar I have seen no reason not to believe him. Anything he has posted that has interested me I have looked up and found to be true. Whereas as many here have plenty of reasons to never believe you.
I am sick and tired of your "amateur" author remarks. First off if the site appalls you that much then do everyone a huge favor and get of of it. I mean it must be terrible to deal with us every day
Second you're write here posting on this site to so...I know you are but what are we?
And once more-and no worries people I won;t go off with more links and nuumbers0- I have seen nothing from you that shows me you're than anyone else above any of us here that are publishing. You're no less an amateur than anyone else. In fact you're not even as successful as many here.
You are now arguing with someone that in my time here I have never seen utter a bad word towards anyone and never be snarky
Life existed before Webster and the CMS. What is true for modern is not all that ever existed.
Google/Wiki and even the dictionary is as good as the information put into it by people and those people choose to enter and they are not going into the "wayback machine" to do so.
Tio says he is a scholar I have seen no reason not to believe him. Anything he has posted that has interested me I have looked up and found to be true. Whereas as many here have plenty of reasons to never believe you.
Last edited:
patientlee
I won't tell!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2011
- Posts
- 2,978
I was beginning to think that this this thread was L'Académie Américaine, n'est-ce pas?
LadyVer
Definitely not a mouse
- Joined
- May 26, 2012
- Posts
- 19,013
Well, I haven't seen it in that context before, but I've never read Pratchett. Pratchett's a scifi writer, right?
stickygirl
All the witches
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Posts
- 21,197
Tio… you're so damned hot 
I've tiptoed my way through ( threw ) the posts, noting my favourite typos with silent embarrassment along the way. Ones reaction to spotting a howler is interesting: mine is literally a tangible one, as though I was shown a photo of myself with my blouse not tucked in or worse. Likewise I feel there is an unspoken shame attached to edited posts, as though edited versions are soiled goods: am I the only one the think that?
I confess that the part of my brain that translates word sounds to written form often lets me down, despite my abhorrence of such simple mistakes. ( I'd be interested to know how the brain performs that task, which we take so much for granted. ) I frequently have to backspace to 'your' when I know perfectly well it should be 'you're' so it is not so much a lack of knowledge, but haste or dyslexic fingers or motor control or summinck (sic)
Reading old novels is always enlightening as to how our beautiful, liquid and multi-fauceted language evolves
I've tiptoed my way through ( threw ) the posts, noting my favourite typos with silent embarrassment along the way. Ones reaction to spotting a howler is interesting: mine is literally a tangible one, as though I was shown a photo of myself with my blouse not tucked in or worse. Likewise I feel there is an unspoken shame attached to edited posts, as though edited versions are soiled goods: am I the only one the think that?
I confess that the part of my brain that translates word sounds to written form often lets me down, despite my abhorrence of such simple mistakes. ( I'd be interested to know how the brain performs that task, which we take so much for granted. ) I frequently have to backspace to 'your' when I know perfectly well it should be 'you're' so it is not so much a lack of knowledge, but haste or dyslexic fingers or motor control or summinck (sic)
Reading old novels is always enlightening as to how our beautiful, liquid and multi-fauceted language evolves
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,870
I reacted to what you actually posted, Tio, which was dismissive of standards of usage that U.S. publisher do impose on what they publish and that isn't being the least bit helpful to anyone with an interest in getting published in the U.S. market or in "doing it right" by U.S. standards. What other reason do authors ask for advice on this forum on proper usage than that they want their work to pass standards while still be creative within those standards? Standards and arbiters of style jolly well do exist.
It's immaturity and the silliness of the Internet that encourages folks to jab a messenger they don't like rather than concentrating on the message and how it affects what they are trying to do with their writing. I don't apologize for taking the writing side of this Web site seriously.
It's immaturity and the silliness of the Internet that encourages folks to jab a messenger they don't like rather than concentrating on the message and how it affects what they are trying to do with their writing. I don't apologize for taking the writing side of this Web site seriously.
Last edited:
SecondCircle
Sin Cara
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,410
He's not suggesting we throw standards or Webster's out the window. I think he's saying that the new common usage is the standard to go by, but pointing out that technically it's wrong.
stickygirl
All the witches
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Posts
- 21,197
Specifically
check - simply confused with cheque
receipt - often spelt 'check'
spelt - often 'spelled' ( I think both are correct )
whilst - often the source of amusement stateside
permanence - permenance ( always have three goes at that myself )
oestrogen - estrogen ( again usage )
and the extra 'e' as in useage,
manoeuvre - often 'manouver'
check - simply confused with cheque
receipt - often spelt 'check'
spelt - often 'spelled' ( I think both are correct )
whilst - often the source of amusement stateside
permanence - permenance ( always have three goes at that myself )
oestrogen - estrogen ( again usage )
and the extra 'e' as in useage,
manoeuvre - often 'manouver'
PennLady
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2009
- Posts
- 9,412
I also think that people are simply more informal on this website, and that's fine. In that sense there's no final say. However, if you want to move into publishing, you probably should abide by the standards.
Specifically
check - simply confused with cheque
receipt - often spelt 'check'
spelt - often 'spelled' ( I think both are correct )
whilst - often the source of amusement stateside
permanence - permenance ( always have three goes at that myself )
oestrogen - estrogen ( again usage )
and the extra 'e' as in useage,
manoeuvre - often 'manouver'
I've never seen "manouver." But in the US we'd spell it "maneuver" anyway.
"Spelt" is also a type of wheat. Not that I think of that definition too often.
stickygirl
All the witches
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Posts
- 21,197
Ah - I stand corrected - maneuver it must be
and a fine, low in gluten wheat it is: spelled spelt
Handley_Page
Draco interdum Vincit
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2007
- Posts
- 78,200
Such a thing is only a standard because those who need such a thing accept it as such.
For want of any other 'authoritative view, a brief look at my Oxford gives:
livor /lv/ n. arch. LME. [L.]
1 Discoloration of the skin, as from bruising or in a corpse. LME.
2 Ill will, malignity, spite.
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Oxford Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1998 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
I suspect that what we have here is an original failure to pronounce the word properly. Predictably,trying to look up "Livor" spots on the web seems to fail, mostly, I suspect, due to the Americanisation of what's out there. That the word Liver is in general use does not necessarily make it 'right'.
Last edited:
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,870
You caught, I hope, that I constantly referred to U.S. style. UK style can be whatever it is--and if the story was UK style and the author wanted to use "livor spots," I, as an editor, would leave it that way (since I now know of the history of the phrase). Have no idea what the U.S.-based and U.S. style Web site would do with it, though, as we frequently get complaints of stories UK style this and that being rejected here.
The discussion wasn't framed by Tio as a difference between the U.S. style and UK style. It was framed as the use of "liver spots" being an irritating mistake--no caveats on that.
I don't apologize for trying to keep what's being discussed clear either just as I don't apologize for not playing games with writing issues here.
And once again, Handley creeps in with dismissive on style standards and in using them. Standards are set for the readers, not the authors. "It's all about me" authors aren't going to last long in publishing.
Dollars to donuts that if a reader runs into "livor spots" in a story on this site, they are going to stop the flow of the reading and consider that rendering an author's mistake. And the author who doesn't care about that is just being "it's all about me" arrogant.
The discussion wasn't framed by Tio as a difference between the U.S. style and UK style. It was framed as the use of "liver spots" being an irritating mistake--no caveats on that.
I don't apologize for trying to keep what's being discussed clear either just as I don't apologize for not playing games with writing issues here.
And once again, Handley creeps in with dismissive on style standards and in using them. Standards are set for the readers, not the authors. "It's all about me" authors aren't going to last long in publishing.
Dollars to donuts that if a reader runs into "livor spots" in a story on this site, they are going to stop the flow of the reading and consider that rendering an author's mistake. And the author who doesn't care about that is just being "it's all about me" arrogant.
Last edited:
SecondCircle
Sin Cara
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,410
That's right. But for the purpose of the thread, Tio knows the difference in the words, and it bugs him that it's misused and accepted. So he posted it. Then, whatever Tio decides to do or not to do in mainstream publishing is Tio's business.
SecondCircle
Sin Cara
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,410
Someone brought up missed keystrokes. Has if/of been covered? I screw that one up all the time. The "I" and "O".
Stella_Omega
No Gentleman
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Posts
- 39,700
constantly.
or typing in the dark, and reading absolute gibberish because you've been one key to the right the whole time.
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 41,955
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 41,955
The livor thing is still going? Well of course it is, look who's involved.
End of the day am I the only one that feels along the lines of who gives a shit?
End of the day am I the only one that feels along the lines of who gives a shit?
patientlee
I won't tell!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2011
- Posts
- 2,978
The oPhone gets me every time on that one. I blame the Itter Box.
patientlee
I won't tell!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2011
- Posts
- 2,978
My gibberish usually happens when I fall asleep while I'm typing.
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 41,955
On the subject of simple typing miscues and how people vary one thing I always do is
"Hands on" always comes out "hand son" and of course spell check is not going to pick that one up.
"Hands on" always comes out "hand son" and of course spell check is not going to pick that one up.
patientlee
I won't tell!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2011
- Posts
- 2,978
I just keep wondering why we're discussing it on a porn board. I have this image of Golden Girls Gone Wild in my head. It's not a pretty sight.
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 41,955
Similar threads
