Discussion:
Gruntled?
(too old to reply)
Killer Instinct
2012-03-12 19:14:39 UTC
Permalink
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?

If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?

/A



--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ***@netfront.net ---
the Omrud
2012-03-12 19:18:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
Not really. PG Wodehouse used it, but only as a joke:

- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that,
if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.
Post by Killer Instinct
If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?
Well, clearly, if "gruntled" is not a word then "disgruntled" is not a
negative and "not disgruntled" is not a double negative.

How about "contented", "satisfied", "uncritical"?
--
David
Peter Brooks
2012-03-12 19:33:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
But the word has had life beyond that:

" [OED]
gruntled, ppl. a.

(ˈgrʌnt(ə)ld)

[Back-formation f. disgruntled a.]

Pleased, satisfied, contented.

   1938 Wodehouse Code of Woosters i. 9 He spoke with a certain what-
is-it in his voice, and I could see that, if not actually disgruntled,
he was far from being gruntled.    1962 C. Rohan Delinquents 76 Come
on, Brownie darling, be gruntled.    1966 New Statesman 11 Nov. 693/2
An action against a barrister for negligence‥would open the door to
every disgruntled client. Now gruntled clients are rare in the
criminal courts.    1967 E. McGirr Hearse with Horses i. 17 The Agency
has a nice file of gruntled exes who have found their talents in a
great variety of jobs.

"
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
2012-03-12 19:58:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that,
if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.
The OED defines "gruntled" without labelling it as jocular. However, in
my experience it is not nearly as widely used and accepted without
calling attention to itself as is "disgruntled".
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?
Well, clearly, if "gruntled" is not a word then "disgruntled" is not a
negative and "not disgruntled" is not a double negative.
How about "contented", "satisfied", "uncritical"?
The OED defines it as "pleased, satisfied, contented."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
retrosorter
2012-03-12 20:42:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that,
if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.
The OED defines "gruntled" without labelling it as jocular. However, in
my experience it is not nearly as widely used and accepted without
calling attention to itself as is "disgruntled".
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?
Well, clearly, if "gruntled" is not a word then "disgruntled" is not a
negative and "not disgruntled" is not a double negative.
How about "contented", "satisfied", "uncritical"?
The OED defines it as "pleased, satisfied, contented."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
I don't regard gruntled as a very ept word.
Duggy
2012-03-12 22:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by retrosorter
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
I don't regard gruntled as a very ept word.
The sort of person who would consider "gruntled" an ept word I
wouldn't parage them because they are probably not be very shevelled
or kempt in their personal habits and not couth at all. They probably
use the language is domitable but it is barely scathed so I'm mayed as
the language remains mantled.

===
= DUG.
===
Mike L
2012-03-12 23:38:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:42:31 -0700 (PDT), retrosorter
Post by retrosorter
Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that,
if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.
The OED defines "gruntled" without labelling it as jocular. However, in
my experience it is not nearly as widely used and accepted without
calling attention to itself as is "disgruntled".
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?
Well, clearly, if "gruntled" is not a word then "disgruntled" is not a
negative and "not disgruntled" is not a double negative.
How about "contented", "satisfied", "uncritical"?
The OED defines it as "pleased, satisfied, contented."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
I don't regard gruntled as a very ept word.
I find it rather gusting, if not actually iquitous. Didn't most of us
play this game as students?
--
Mike.
m***@att.net
2012-03-13 00:37:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike L
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:42:31 -0700 (PDT), retrosorter
Post by retrosorter
Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that,
if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.
The OED defines "gruntled" without labelling it as jocular. However, in
my experience it is not nearly as widely used and accepted without
calling attention to itself as is "disgruntled".
Post by the Omrud
Post by Killer Instinct
If not then is there seriously any way of writing "I am not disgruntled"
without using a double negative?
Well, clearly, if "gruntled" is not a word then "disgruntled" is not a
negative and "not disgruntled" is not a double negative.
How about "contented", "satisfied", "uncritical"?
The OED defines it as "pleased, satisfied, contented."
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
I don't regard gruntled as a very ept word.
I find it rather gusting, if not actually iquitous. Didn't most of us
play this game as students?
--
Mike.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And spoke of it here 14 years ago, it seems....
<snip>
Post by Mike L
The Society for the Preservation of Tithesis commends your
ebriated and scrutable use of delible and defatigable, which
are gainly, sipid and couth. We are gruntled and consolate
that you have the ertia and eptitude to choose such putably
pensible tithesis, which we parage.
Just for fun, let's see how many of these "coinages" are actually
formed by
a sawing-off of a negative prefix and how many just seem to be.

"couth": fine. It literally means "well known"; originally "uncouth"
meant
"unknown" and then drifted into its present meaning of "unmannerly"
(consider "unheard-of behavior").


"gruntle": nope. The "dis-" sawed off here is not a negative "dis-"
but the
"dis-" that means "apart". Here, in fact, it's an intensifier.


"kempt": fine. It's an archaic past participle of "comb"; "unkempt"
is
literally "uncombed".


"shevel": hard to say; probably not. Again, "dis-" here means
"apart".


"gust": fine.


"may": maybe, but not for the reason it looks like. "Dis-" here is an
intensifier as in "disgruntle", but originally the word comes from
"dis-"
plus Vulgar Latin "exmagare". If all you're left with at the end is
"may",
the "ex-" must have been taken off as well - and that _is_ negative.


"tithesis": no way. While "antithesis" certainly has a negative
prefix,
it's "anti-", not "an-". And "thesis" is a real word.


"ebriated": uh-uh. The "in-" in "inebriated" is an intensifier, not a
negative.


"scrutable": fine; in fact, it's in the AHD.


"delible": okay.


"defatigable": fine.


"gainly": also in the AHD.


"sipid": the "in-" is a negative prefix, all right, but when
unprefixed the
vowel expands back to its full value. It should be "sapid", which is
a
word.


"consolate": okay.


"ertia": like "insipid", the vowel changed when prefixed. Ought to be
"artia".


"eptitude": similarly, "ineptitude" is actually the opposite of
"aptitude".


"putably": not really. This is "dis-" meaning "apart" in the sense of
"different".


"pensible": nope. "Dis-" means "apart" in "dispensible".


"parage": fine, surprisingly. "Disparage" originally meant "deprive
of
rank"; "parage" ("peerage") is "rank".


-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Peter Moylan
2012-03-13 01:08:51 UTC
Permalink
***@att.net wrote:

[quoting a 1988 posting by Aaron Dinkin]
Post by m***@att.net
"shevel": hard to say; probably not. Again, "dis-" here means
"apart".
I've always had the uncomfortable feeling that the opposite of
"dishevelled" should be "hevelled", but of course etymologically I'm wrong.

This sent me on a wild goose chase a few minutes ago. I remembered that
there was an early 20th century pronunciation of "déshabillé" as
"desh-a-beal", and it suddenly struck me that "desh-a-beal" and
"dishevel" might be related. They're not, though.

But wait a minute. Perhaps that "desh-a-beal" (or "dish o' veal")
pronunciation was prompted by someone's mistaken belief that the words
were related.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
James Hogg
2012-03-13 07:01:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
[quoting a 1988 posting by Aaron Dinkin]
Post by m***@att.net
"shevel": hard to say; probably not. Again, "dis-" here means
"apart".
I've always had the uncomfortable feeling that the opposite of
"dishevelled" should be "hevelled", but of course etymologically I'm wrong.
This sent me on a wild goose chase a few minutes ago. I remembered that
there was an early 20th century pronunciation of "déshabillé" as
"desh-a-beal", and it suddenly struck me that "desh-a-beal" and
"dishevel" might be related. They're not, though.
But wait a minute. Perhaps that "desh-a-beal" (or "dish o' veal")
pronunciation was prompted by someone's mistaken belief that the words
were related.
The Ulster form that I know is "out in his dissables". There are several
variants in English dialects: dishabells, dizzybells, etc.
--
James
J. J. Lodder
2012-03-12 22:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
Of course, by a well known work of History
the fortifications of Dunkirk gruntled again and again,
after having been disgruntled and raised to the ground.

It's Memorable, even,

Jan
Christian Weisgerber
2012-03-12 21:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
Not really. It's not the only case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber ***@mips.inka.de
Duggy
2012-03-13 00:02:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
Not really.  It's not the only case:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
It's missing some:

Ited - coming apart.
Tant - close.
Ppealing - unattractive.
Bful - even more holy.

===
= DUG.
===
Peter Young
2012-03-13 08:23:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".

Peter. (who is never couth, kepmt or shevelled.)
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Peter Young
2012-03-13 13:37:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
Peter. (who is never couth, kepmt or shevelled.)
^^^^^

Or even kempt.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
R H Draney
2012-03-13 18:38:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Peter Young
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
Peter. (who is never couth, kepmt or shevelled.)
^^^^^
Or even kempt.
I reckon you were plused until you spotted that....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Peter Young
2012-03-13 19:04:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by R H Draney
Post by Peter Young
Post by Peter Young
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
Peter. (who is never couth, kepmt or shevelled.)
^^^^^
Or even kempt.
I reckon you were plused until you spotted that....r
Indeed, but I wasn't very ept, it seems.

Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Robert Bannister
2012-03-14 04:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by R H Draney
Post by Peter Young
Post by Peter Young
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
Peter. (who is never couth, kepmt or shevelled.)
^^^^^
Or even kempt.
I reckon you were plused until you spotted that....r
Indeed, but I wasn't very ept, it seems.
Peter.
For a moment, I suspected you of being a kept man.
--
Robert Bannister
J. J. Lodder
2012-03-14 13:15:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
But not very original.
The Memorabe historical source
(which Wodehouse must have been aware of)
pre-dates it by about 10 years,

Jan
Evan Kirshenbaum
2012-03-14 17:14:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Young
Post by Christian Weisgerber
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaired_word
The classic case is from P.G.Wodehouse (quoted from memory): "I could
see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being
gruntled".
But not very original.
The Memorabe historical source
(which Wodehouse must have been aware of)
pre-dates it by about 10 years,
I haven't really been following this discussion (I'm way behind and
catching up sort of backwards), but "(dis)gruntled" is a weird case.
"Gruntle", the word that led to "disgruntled", does still exist,
though it's not common, as a verb meaning "to utter a little or low
grunt". The "dis-" is interpreted by the OED as an intensifier rather
than as a negative, and the transitive verb (from which the adjective
is derived) is something like "to put in a state where you grumble".
"Gruntled" as a positive is a back-formation due to reanalyzing the
prefix as a negative.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The vast majority of humans have
SF Bay Area (1982-) |more than the average number of
Chicago (1964-1982) |legs.

***@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Duggy
2012-03-19 03:43:26 UTC
Permalink
Another thread title has made me think.

Habilitate?

===
= DUG.
===
David Dyer-Bennet
2012-03-13 18:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!

David Dyer-Bennet, member, Society for the Restoration of Lost Positives
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-***@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
Evan Kirshenbaum
2012-03-14 01:51:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").

"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The Society for the Preservation of
SF Bay Area (1982-) |Tithesis commends your ebriated and
Chicago (1964-1982) |scrutable use of delible and
|defatigable, which are gainly, sipid
***@gmail.com |and couth. We are gruntled and
|consolate that you have the ertia and
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |eptitude to choose such putably
|pensible tithesis, which we parage.
Adam Funk
2012-03-14 12:38:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
It also cites "couth" from "OE" (no specific date) and "uncouth" from
c897.

OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
--
Some say the world will end in fire; some say in segfaults.
[XKCD 312]
Peter Young
2012-03-14 13:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Funk
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
It also cites "couth" from "OE" (no specific date) and "uncouth" from
c897.
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
"Canny" is still in use in northern BrE.

Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Adam Funk
2012-03-14 20:45:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
"Canny" is still in use in northern BrE.
Yes, I like that one, but not as much as "oxter".
--
It is probable that television drama of high caliber and produced by
first-rate artists will materially raise the level of dramatic taste
of the nation. (David Sarnoff, CEO of RCA, 1939; in Stoll 1995)
James Silverton
2012-03-14 21:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Funk
Post by Peter Young
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
"Canny" is still in use in northern BrE.
Yes, I like that one, but not as much as "oxter".
Geordie chant "Hey, canny man throw a ha'pny oot. Me faither's in gaol
and ah canna get him oot!"
--
Jim Silverton

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.
Robert Bannister
2012-03-15 04:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Adam Funk
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
It also cites "couth" from "OE" (no specific date) and "uncouth" from
c897.
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
"Canny" is still in use in northern BrE.
"Canny" and "uncanny" are hardly opposites.
I find the German "unheimlich" (which can mean uncanny) strange too,
since "heimlich" means "secretly" or "furtively" and not "homely", which
is what it looks like.
--
Robert Bannister
Steve Hayes
2012-03-15 06:55:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Bannister
"Canny" and "uncanny" are hardly opposites.
I find the German "unheimlich" (which can mean uncanny) strange too,
since "heimlich" means "secretly" or "furtively" and not "homely", which
is what it looks like.
Ah, perhaps something like that might account for my being told by a lecturer
in police science, when I queried his equating of "inertia" with
"secretiveness", that it was absolutely correct, and a technical term.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
James Hogg
2012-03-15 07:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Young
Post by Adam Funk
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such
a word as "gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed")
nearly 700 years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of
"uncombed", another 60-odd years before it is cited in the
sense of "dishevelled").
It also cites "couth" from "OE" (no specific date) and "uncouth"
from c897.
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I
suspect those dates for written citations are close enough that
we can't really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
"Canny" is still in use in northern BrE.
"Canny" and "uncanny" are hardly opposites. I find the German
"unheimlich" (which can mean uncanny) strange too, since "heimlich"
means "secretly" or "furtively" and not "homely", which is what it
looks like.
The semantic development, according to Kluge, is from "zum Haus gehörig"
to "einheimisch" to "vertraut" to "(Fremden) verborgen". The meaning of
"unheimlich" must have been fixed as the opposite of "heimlich" when it
meant "familiar".
--
James
Steve Hayes
2012-03-14 20:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Duggy
2012-03-14 20:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
And they walked into a bar?

===
= DUG.
===
R H Draney
2012-03-14 20:40:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duggy
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
And they walked into a bar?
Later that same evening, in another part of town, in a seemingly deserted
warehouse....

....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Steve Hayes
2012-03-15 06:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duggy
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
And they walked into a bar?
That's another thread.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Duggy
2012-03-15 06:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Duggy
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
And they walked into a bar?
That's another thread.
She'd not the atheist's daughter?

===
= DUG.
===
Steve Hayes
2012-03-15 06:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duggy
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Duggy
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Adam Funk
OTOH, "canny" from 1637 but "uncanny" from 1596 --- however, I suspect
those dates for written citations are close enough that we can't
really say than "uncanny" came first in speech.
And then there's atheist and theist.
And they walked into a bar?
That's another thread.
She'd not the atheist's daughter?
She'd probly rather not.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Adam Funk
2013-10-04 12:11:07 UTC
Permalink
Cartoon, SFW:

http://www.gocomics.com/getfuzzy/2013/10/04
--
The Nixon I remembered was absolutely humorless; I couldn't imagine
him laughing at anything except maybe a paraplegic who wanted to vote
Democratic but couldn't quite reach the lever on the voting machine.
--- Hunter S Thompson
David Dyer-Bennet
2012-03-14 16:08:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
Yes, it's a "lost" positive; implying it once existed.
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-***@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
Evan Kirshenbaum
2012-03-14 17:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word
as "gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly
700 years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed",
another 60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of
"dishevelled").
Yes, it's a "lost" positive; implying it once existed.
Ah, I thought that what was being discussed was things like
"dishevelled", whose "positive" was formed by reanalysis, and where
the reanalyzed word was often a word that was borrowed with the the
supposed prefix (in this case from Old French "deschevelé").

As for "kempt", the OED has six citations from the twentieth century,
and Google Books lists 2,490 hits for "well-kempt" (and the _NY Times_
has 42), so I'm not sure how "lost" it is.
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |You cannot solve problems with the
SF Bay Area (1982-) |same type of thinking that created
Chicago (1964-1982) |them.
| Albert Einstein
***@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Mike L
2012-03-14 20:14:52 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:51:52 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
--
Mike.
Evan Kirshenbaum
2012-03-14 20:58:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike L
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:51:52 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.

"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |Never ascribe to malice that which
SF Bay Area (1982-) |can adequately be explained by
Chicago (1964-1982) |stupidity.

***@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Steve Hayes
2012-03-15 06:06:43 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.

It separates the threads into usable pieces.

But an unravelled garment is no longer any use as a garment.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Brooks
2012-03-15 06:04:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray".  My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
It separates the threads into usable pieces.
But an unravelled garment is no longer any use as a garment.
But the ravelled sleeve of each day's care, that's knitted up by
innocent sleep, is what we'd call an unravelled sleeve if we took it
to a knitter today.
Steve Hayes
2012-03-15 06:58:12 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:04:31 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray".  My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
It separates the threads into usable pieces.
But an unravelled garment is no longer any use as a garment.
But the ravelled sleeve of each day's care, that's knitted up by
innocent sleep, is what we'd call an unravelled sleeve if we took it
to a knitter today.
Only when the next day's care unravelled it in order to reknit it.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Brooks
2012-03-15 06:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:04:31 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray".  My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
It separates the threads into usable pieces.
But an unravelled garment is no longer any use as a garment.
But the ravelled sleeve of each day's care, that's knitted up by
innocent sleep, is what we'd call an unravelled sleeve if we took it
to a knitter today.
Only when the next day's care unravelled it in order to reknit it.
No. It is the ravelled sleeve that needs reknitting.

The full text is here: [Macbeth Act 2 Scene 2]:

"
Methought I heard a voice cry 'Sleep no more!
Macbeth does murder sleep', the innocent sleep,
Sleep that knits up the ravell'd sleeve of care,
The death of each day's life, sore labour's bath,
Balm of hurt minds, great nature's second course,
Chief nourisher in life's feast,--
"
James Hogg
2012-03-15 07:24:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
--
James
Katy Jennison
2012-03-15 11:32:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
That would be where they start face down on the ice and end up on their
feet?
--
Katy Jennison
Robert Bannister
2012-03-16 07:47:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
--
Robert Bannister
Peter Brooks
2012-03-16 07:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray".  My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
J. J. Lodder
2012-03-16 08:45:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
The one that gets you Bo,

Jan
James Hogg
2012-03-16 09:04:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
The one that gets you Bo,
I'll give you 10 for that one.
--
James
Duggy
2012-03-16 09:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Hogg
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray".  My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
The one that gets you Bo,
I'll give you 10 for that one.
There was no 10, she got a 11.

===
= DUG.
===
James Hogg
2012-03-16 09:51:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Duggy
Post by James Hogg
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
The one that gets you Bo,
I'll give you 10 for that one.
There was no 10, she got a 11.
Isn't 10 enough for Lodder?
--
James
R H Draney
2012-03-16 20:57:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Hogg
Post by Duggy
Post by James Hogg
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Brooks
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by James Hogg
Post by Steve Hayes
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:58:40 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Mike L
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
"Ravel" is a weird one, as it appears to have become its own opposite.
Originally, it was "tangled" (cited to the early sixteenth century),
but by the early seventeenth, the OED cites it in a transitive sense
of "to cause to unravel or fray". My guess is that both being tangled
and being frayed were seen as similar "incorrect" states for thread.
"Unravel" shows up at the same time (start of the seventeenth
century), presumably taking "ravel" in a stricter sense.
One unravels a knitted garment, just as one unravels tangled thread.
What about a bolero?
Great tune.
Which bolero?
The one that gets you Bo,
I'll give you 10 for that one.
There was no 10, she got a 11.
Isn't 10 enough for Lodder?
But these go to eleven....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Peter Brooks
2012-03-14 21:22:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike L
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:51:52 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by David Dyer-Bennet
Post by Killer Instinct
I have seen it as the subject of a joke, but is there such a word as
"gruntled"?
My, you're looking very sheveled and kempt this morning!
The OED cites "kempt" (which, by the way, is just "combed") nearly 700
years before "unkempt" (in the strict sense of "uncombed", another
60-odd years before it is cited in the sense of "dishevelled").
"Shevelled" is listed, cited to 1613, but as a reduced ("aphetic")
form of "dishevelled" rather than as a back-formation.
"Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care..."
The 'innocent' sleep - that of the guilty leaves the sleeve ravelled.
Loading...