Discussion:
Honed
Add Reply
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-01-11 09:09:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
A sentence from the Guardian:

“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.

Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
--
athel
Harrison Hill
2018-01-11 09:40:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-01-11 12:14:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone

hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
‘he was carefully honing the curved blade’

2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.

‘some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football’

2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
‘she has been working hard to hone her physique’

3 hone in on
‘the detectives honed in on the suspect’

another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
‘I started to hone in on the problem’

NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.

Origin
Middle English: from Old English han ‘stone’, of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.

"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet

Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning ‘sharp’.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-11 14:53:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,

Jan
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 15:09:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
Harrison Hill
2018-01-11 15:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
Most of us here seem to think of it as illiteracy. The fact that
Athel doesn't, sways the argument your way; and on that basis, it is
surprising that PTD hasn't put in his tuppennyworth.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 15:32:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
Most of us here seem to think of it as illiteracy. The fact that
Athel doesn't, sways the argument your way; and on that basis, it is
surprising that PTD hasn't put in his tuppennyworth.
I don't think ANYBODY is claiming it's illiteracy whatever they
think of the usage as it's a quotation of direct speech!
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 16:33:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
Most of us here seem to think of it as illiteracy. The fact that
Athel doesn't, sways the argument your way; and on that basis, it is
surprising that PTD hasn't put in his tuppennyworth.
He was out shopping and visiting the barber. (It was the first day the car
could get free of the compacted snow and ice, since we've finally had nearly
24 hr of super-freezing temperature.) (What's the opposite of "sub-freezing"?
"Super-freezing" looks like it ought to mean 'rilly rilly freezing'.)
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 16:31:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
No, the Guardian was correct in indicating that the error wasn't theirs. And
that "oxforddictionaries.com" doesn't mark it "nonstandard," or whatever its
equivalent is, is on them.
Paul Carmichael
2018-01-12 15:30:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:40:37 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
"He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue," Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
"Homed" is the obvious word, hence the sic. "Honed" usually means
"sharpened" doesn't it? On a wetted whet-stone?
Yes.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hone
hone
VERB
1 with object Sharpen (a blade)
'he was carefully honing the curved blade'
2 with object Refine or perfect (something) over a period of time.
'some of the best players in the world honed their skills playing
street football'
2.1 Give greater strength or firmness to (the body or a part of the
body)
'she has been working hard to hone her physique'
3 hone in on
'the detectives honed in on the suspect'
another way of saying "home in on" (see home)
'I started to hone in on the problem'
NOUN
A whetstone, especially one used to sharpen razors.
Origin
Middle English: from Old English han 'stone', of Germanic origin;
related to Old Norse hein.
"whet" means to sharpen, literally or figuratively.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/whet
Origin
Old English hwettan, of Germanic origin; related to German wetzen,
based on an adjective meaning 'sharp'.
So The Guardian is correct, by meaning #3,
No, the Guardian is incorrect in adding (sic) to suggest that
the speaker they quote was incorrect.
No, the Guardian was correct in indicating that the error wasn't theirs. And
that "oxforddictionaries.com" doesn't mark it "nonstandard," or whatever its
equivalent is, is on them.
Looks like it's a septic thang:

OED:

Etymology: Apparently an alteration of home v.
orig. U.S.

intr. to hone in: to head directly for something; to turn one's attention intently
towards something. Usually with on.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Adam Funk
2018-01-11 09:35:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
I think it's a mistake for "homed in". You hone a knife --- it's a
straighforward transitive verb.
--
"It is the role of librarians to keep government running in difficult
times," replied Dramoren. "Librarians are the last line of defence
against chaos." (McMullen 2001)
Cheryl
2018-01-11 09:49:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
--
Cheryl
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 10:45:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?

It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Cheryl
2018-01-11 11:14:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Adoption is a process rather than instantaneous, so naturally there are
going to be periods in which a certain usage is both an error for some
people and a welcome innovation for others. This particular example
still gives me a gut feeling that it's wrong, so I'm obviously not ready
to shift to the "adoption" side of things.

And are the 1960s really that long ago? I can remember parts of them
quite well.
--
Cheryl
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 11:28:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cheryl
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Adoption is a process rather than instantaneous, so naturally there are
going to be periods in which a certain usage is both an error for some
people and a welcome innovation for others. This particular example
still gives me a gut feeling that it's wrong, so I'm obviously not ready
to shift to the "adoption" side of things.
And are the 1960s really that long ago? I can remember parts of them
quite well.
Half a century is a long time ago for a language. Doubly so for English
in recent times, with over 5000 neologisms created every year of which
around a 1000 are likely to make it to future dictionaries.
Theodore Heise
2018-01-11 13:36:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:42 -0800 (PST),
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it
seems to be used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a
confusion with 'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in'
more frequently, though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how
language is degenerating these days, but that makes me feel
like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too
late. Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in',
'hone in' has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s
and was in use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's
not as if it's an absurd development. What are you doing in
'homing in' if not sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Perhaps I'm being ridiculous, but I'm with Cheryl on this one, and
consider it an error.
--
Ted Heise <***@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA
Peter Moylan
2018-01-12 01:55:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Theodore Heise
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:42 -0800 (PST),
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it
seems to be used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a
confusion with 'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in'
more frequently, though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how
language is degenerating these days, but that makes me feel
like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too
late. Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in',
'hone in' has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s
and was in use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's
not as if it's an absurd development. What are you doing in
'homing in' if not sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Perhaps I'm being ridiculous, but I'm with Cheryl on this one, and
consider it an error.
+1

Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.

Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.

Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.

I suggest that we're still at step 1.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Lewis
2018-01-12 06:24:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Theodore Heise
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:42 -0800 (PST),
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it
seems to be used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a
confusion with 'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in'
more frequently, though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how
language is degenerating these days, but that makes me feel
like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too
late. Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in',
'hone in' has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s
and was in use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's
not as if it's an absurd development. What are you doing in
'homing in' if not sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Perhaps I'm being ridiculous, but I'm with Cheryl on this one, and
consider it an error.
+1
Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.
Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.
Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.
I suggest that we're still at step 1.
Stats are against you.

Usage note in the NOAD:

"The traditional form for the verbal phrase meaning ‘move accurately
towards a target’ is home in on, not hone in on. More than a third of
citations for this expression in the Oxford English Corpus are for hone
in on, however, and in the US this form has become common even in edited
text. Nonetheless, hone in on is still regarded by many as incorrect,
and it remains relatively rare in British use."

So, at least in AmE we're at least at step 2.5
--
I used to work in a fire hydrant factory. You couldn't park anywhere near the place.
Richard Tobin
2018-01-12 11:25:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lewis
Post by Peter Moylan
Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.
Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.
Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.
I suggest that we're still at step 1.
Stats are against you.
For a phrase like "home in on" I don't think there's necessarily a
reliable progression. The underlying metaphor will sustain the
original, and the word "hone" is rare enough that the variant
could just fade away.

-- Richard
Lewis
2018-01-12 17:23:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Lewis
Post by Peter Moylan
Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.
Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.
Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.
I suggest that we're still at step 1.
Stats are against you.
For a phrase like "home in on" I don't think there's necessarily a
reliable progression. The underlying metaphor will sustain the
original, and the word "hone" is rare enough that the variant
could just fade away.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=home+in+on%2C+hone+in+on&year_start=1970&year_end=2010&corpus=17&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Chome%20in%20on%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Chone%20in%20on%3B%2Cc0>
--
Forever was over. All the sands had fallen. The great race between
entropy and energy had been run, and the favourite had been the winner
after all. Perhaps he ought to sharpen the blade again? No. Not much
point, really.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-12 12:14:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Theodore Heise
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:42 -0800 (PST),
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it
seems to be used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a
confusion with 'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in'
more frequently, though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how
language is degenerating these days, but that makes me feel
like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too
late. Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in',
'hone in' has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s
and was in use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's
not as if it's an absurd development. What are you doing in
'homing in' if not sharpening your focus?
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
Perhaps I'm being ridiculous, but I'm with Cheryl on this one, and
consider it an error.
+1
Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.
Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.
Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.
I suggest that we're still at step 1.
--
If we were at step 1 it wouldn't be in the OED. If we were at step 2 it might be in the OED but with a qualification indicating that it was limited in use. It is in the OED, without qualification, therefore we are at step 3.
Paul Wolff
2018-01-12 15:14:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Step 1: a few poorly-educated people adopt an erroneous usage, based on
a mishearing or misunderstanding.
Step 2: a larger number of people adopt it.
Step 3: a majority use it, and it becomes mainstream.
I suggest that we're still at step 1.
If we were at step 1 it wouldn't be in the OED. If we were at step 2 it
might be in the OED but with a qualification indicating that it was
limited in use. It is in the OED, without qualification, therefore we
are at step 3.
Who is the "we" throughout the above?
Achieving step 3 in AmE would qualify a word for the OED even while it
remained at step 1 in both AusE (can't do AuE here!) and BrE.
--
Paul
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 16:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
You don't say you "hone the focus" of a telescope. Honing is for sharp edges.
Bullseyes -- what you home in on -- are not edges, they are points.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
It's an error.

If "hone in on" is becoming accepted in Standard BrE, it's just another sign of
the debasement of that language -- the same language that has all but forgotten
the subjunctive, for instance. Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 16:45:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
You don't say you "hone the focus" of a telescope. Honing is for sharp edges.
Bullseyes -- what you home in on -- are not edges, they are points.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
It's an error.
If "hone in on" is becoming accepted in Standard BrE, it's just another sign of
the debasement of that language -- the same language that has all but forgotten
the subjunctive, for instance. Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
This seems a little removed from your normal descriptivist position.
50 years of usage is surely ample authority? Are you unwell or was
it just a good excuse to have a go at we inferior Brits? If so I should
perhaps remind you that it was Americans what done it as I clearly
indicated when I cited the New York Times as the early adopter!

As for the subjunctive, what subjunctive? English has never had a
subjunctive! The American love for the pseudo-subjunctive is
entirely their own problem. The suggestion that it is somehow
superior is simply asinine.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 17:13:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
You don't say you "hone the focus" of a telescope. Honing is for sharp edges.
Bullseyes -- what you home in on -- are not edges, they are points.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
It's an error.
If "hone in on" is becoming accepted in Standard BrE, it's just another sign of
the debasement of that language -- the same language that has all but forgotten
the subjunctive, for instance. Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
This seems a little removed from your normal descriptivist position.
50 years of usage is surely ample authority? Are you unwell or was
it just a good excuse to have a go at we inferior Brits? If so I should
perhaps remind you that it was Americans what done it as I clearly
indicated when I cited the New York Times as the early adopter!
The (highly descriptive) M-W 11th Collegiate has a "Usage Note" which ends
"your use of it esp. in writing is likely to be called a mistake."

The (usually very prescriptive) American Heritage 5th ed. agrees with Oxford
in having no such warning at all.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
As for the subjunctive, what subjunctive? English has never had a
subjunctive! The American love for the pseudo-subjunctive is
entirely their own problem. The suggestion that it is somehow
superior is simply asinine.
(Again over the years) numerous examples have been provided where a BrE use of
a past instead of a subjunctive is misleading at best and sometimes even close
to incomprehensible.
Harrison Hill
2018-01-11 16:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
You don't say you "hone the focus" of a telescope. Honing is for sharp edges.
Bullseyes -- what you home in on -- are not edges, they are points.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
It's an error.
If "hone in on" is becoming accepted in Standard BrE, it's just another sign of
the debasement of that language -- the same language that has all but forgotten
the subjunctive, for instance. Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
in BrE at all. We listen to it occasionally in:

"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".

A YouTube link to a song which led directly to two Beatles hits:


Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 17:19:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel'; it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
Harrison Hill
2018-01-11 17:26:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel'; it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
I've started another thread. Love the James Taylor song, and
the Beatles connection makes it interesting. "To careen" is not a
verb I have in my vocabulary at all.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-01-11 23:43:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:26:35 -0800 (PST), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel'; it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
I've started another thread. Love the James Taylor song, and
the Beatles connection makes it interesting. "To careen" is not a
verb I have in my vocabulary at all.
I know careen only from reading nautical stuff.
OED:
careen, v.

Etymology: corresponds to modern French caréner, earlier cariner,
Spanish carenar, Italian carenare, < French carène, Spanish carena or
Italian carena keel < Latin carina keel.

Naut.
1.
a. trans. To turn (a ship) over on one side for cleaning, caulking,
or repairing; to clean, caulk, etc. (a ship so turned over).
1600 ...

3. trans. To cause (a ship) to heel over.
1833 ...

4.
a. intr. ‘A ship is said to careen when she inclines to one side, or
lies over when sailing on a wind’ (Smyth Sailor's Word-bk.). Also
transf.; esp. (U.S.) of a motor car.
1762 ...
b. transf. To lean over; to tilt.
1883 ...

5. [Influenced by career v. 2] To rush headlong, to hurtle, esp.
with an unsteady motion. Chiefly U.S.
1923 ...
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
b***@aol.com
2018-01-11 20:49:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Post by Peter T. Daniels
it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-11 22:00:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'. There's even
a constellation by that name, which came about when the enormous constellation
Argo or Argo Navis was broken up.
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
b***@aol.com
2018-01-12 01:33:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?

The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
is the bottommost part of the boat, as clearly illustrated here:

https://www.google.fr/search?q=car%C3%A8ne+avec+quille&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAid7xmdHYAhVLYlAKHSJ1D74Q_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=662#imgrc=IMo2hB7dUklb2M:

In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
There's even
a constellation by that name, which came about when the enormous constellation
Argo or Argo Navis was broken up.
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
it has a number of Nautical senses, as
well as its ordinary one.)
Post by Harrison Hill
"Every now and then the things I lean on lose their meaning
And I find myself careening
In to places where I should not let me go".
http://youtu.be/G00VBTW1fms
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-12 04:12:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
b***@aol.com
2018-01-12 05:30:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-12 13:19:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.

[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]

If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-12 13:47:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
OED concurs.
b***@aol.com
2018-01-12 15:51:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.

By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
of the hull" vs "keel", as testified e.g. by this:

"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"

(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-12 20:11:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French. The etymology
glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'. Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a different
etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
b***@aol.com
2018-01-13 01:24:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French. The
etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that your
source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un bateau) en
carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for cleaning,
caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross mistranslation
of "en carène".

Here are pictures of careened boats and boats on keel, respectively:

- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&biw=1366&bih=662

- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFxxnxSby0

The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a different
etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
But it also says (emphasis mine):

"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"

As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-13 04:30:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French. The
etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that your
source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un bateau) en
carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for cleaning,
caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross mistranslation
of "en carène".
- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&biw=1366&bih=662
- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFxxnxSby0
The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a different
etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"
As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
The prehistory of the French word, and its history after the word entered
English, are not relevant to the English etymology. AHD did you a favor by
taking it back to its IE root.
b***@aol.com
2018-01-13 06:46:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French. The
etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that your
source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un bateau) en
carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for cleaning,
caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross mistranslation
of "en carène".
- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&biw=1366&bih=662
- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFxxnxSby0
The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a different
etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"
As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
French sources don't agree (see below), and it's just common sense: why would a verb that means "turn a ship on its side for cleaning" be
derived from the "bottom" meaning of a noun that can also mean "side"?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
The prehistory of the French word, and its history after the word entered
English, are not relevant to the English etymology.
But the very period in which it entered English is, i.e. 1552 and on
above. M-W says the year is circa 1583, and as you can('t) see, "carene"
already meant "hull" by then.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
AHD did you a favor by
taking it back to its IE root.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-01-13 12:57:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like it came
from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the American
Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for "carène" that
you inferred therefrom, which was the point discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit whether the word
currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'. When the word was borrowed, it
meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins, who was still
the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the French, not
Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French had
given way to French and the word did have the meaning of "immersed part
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French. The
etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that your
source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un bateau) en
carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for cleaning,
caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross mistranslation
of "en carène".
- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&biw=1366&bih=662
- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFxxnxSby0
The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a different
etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"
As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ < Old Italian
_carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
French sources don't agree (see below), and it's just common sense: why would a verb that means "turn a ship on its side for cleaning" be
derived from the "bottom" meaning of a noun that can also mean "side"?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille » (Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités passés entre St-Louis et
le procureur du podestat de Gênes, rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena]
ds Vidos, p. 294), attest. isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque
immergée » (Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4,
p. 47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
The prehistory of the French word, and its history after the word entered
English, are not relevant to the English etymology.
But the very period in which it entered English is, i.e. 1552 and on
above. M-W says the year is circa 1583, and as you can('t) see, "carene"
already meant "hull" by then.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
AHD did you a favor by
taking it back to its IE root.
Some decades ago I came across an "explanation" of the verb "careen"
which said that it was based on "careen" meaning "keel" and that it came
from the idea that when a ship was careened, tilted on to its side, the
keel became visible.

I didn't follow up that to see how accurate it was.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-13 14:50:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen"
doesn't appear in BrE at all. We listen to it
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een
makes it look like it came from Irish.) (No, Fr.
carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused
it with Italian "carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information
provided by the American Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.).
Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to
on rely on general-purpose dictionaries for the
definitions of technical terms ("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in
French) and apparently translates as just "hull" in
English, while the "quille" (keel) is the bottommost part
https://www.google.fr/search?q=car%C3%A8ne+avec+quille&rlz=1C
1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAid7xmdHYAhVLYl
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once
meant "keel" in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the
inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of
the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for
"carène" that you inferred therefrom, which was the point
discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit
whether the word currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'.
When the word was borrowed, it meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ <
Old Italian _carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins,
who was still the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was
published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the
French, not Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it
isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French
had given way to French and the word did have the meaning of
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French.
The etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that
your source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un
bateau) en carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for
cleaning, caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross
mistranslation of "en carène".
- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&s
ource=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&
biw=1366&bih=662
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&
tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22b
oat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0
.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFx
xnxSby0
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a
different etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"
As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ <
Old Italian _carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
French sources don't agree (see below), and it's just common sense: why
would a verb that means "turn a ship on its side for cleaning" be derived
from the "bottom" meaning of a noun that can also mean "side"?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille »
(Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités
passés entre St-Louis et le procureur du podestat de Gênes,
rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena] ds Vidos, p. 294), attest.
isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque immergée »
(Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4, p.
47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
The prehistory of the French word, and its history after the word entered
English, are not relevant to the English etymology.
But the very period in which it entered English is, i.e. 1552 and on
above. M-W says the year is circa 1583, and as you can('t) see, "carene"
already meant "hull" by then.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
AHD did you a favor by
taking it back to its IE root.
Some decades ago I came across an "explanation" of the verb "careen"
which said that it was based on "careen" meaning "keel" and that it came
from the idea that when a ship was careened, tilted on to its side, the
keel became visible.
I didn't follow up that to see how accurate it was.
Not, I'm afraid. More likely also derived
from old Scandinavian and Dutch, kraengen, krengen,

Jan
Jerry Friedman
2018-01-14 18:03:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen"
doesn't appear in BrE at all. We listen to it
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een
makes it look like it came from Irish.) (No, Fr.
carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused
it with Italian "carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information
provided by the American Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.).
Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to
on rely on general-purpose dictionaries for the
definitions of technical terms ("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in
French) and apparently translates as just "hull" in
English, while the "quille" (keel) is the bottommost part
https://www.google.fr/search?q=car%C3%A8ne+avec+quille&rlz=1C
1CHBF_frFR765FR765&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAid7xmdHYAhVLYl
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once
meant "keel" in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the
inaccuracy.
Or maybe complete accuracy with reference to the etymon of
the English word.
The etymon may be right, but the meaning of "keel" for
"carène" that you inferred therefrom, which was the point
discussed, is clearly wrong.
The exact citation is as follows. It does not matter one whit
whether the word currently means 'keel', 'hull', or 'carrot'.
When the word was borrowed, it meant 'keel'.
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ <
Old Italian _carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
If you don't like it, take it up with the late Calvert Watkins,
who was still the etymologies editor when the 5th ed. was
published in 2011.
But you wrote "No, Fr. carène 'keel'", which implies that the
French, not Old French, meaning of the word is "keel", which it
isn't.
By the time the spelling of "carène" appeared (1552), Old French
had given way to French and the word did have the meaning of
The word did not come to English from Old French, but from French.
The etymology glosses "en carène" as 'on keel'.
That's precisely where the shoe pinches and where my assumption that
your source may not be reliable is confirmed, because "mettre (un
bateau) en carène" (= to careen) means "Turn (a ship) on its side for
cleaning, caulking, or repair" (OED), so that "on keel" is a gross
mistranslation of "en carène".
- https://www.google.fr/search?q=careened+boat&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&s
ource=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X1&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdSu2dPYAhWSLVAKHZqXCbcQ_AUICygC&
biw=1366&bih=662
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
- https://www.google.fr/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR765&biw=1366&bih=662&
tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TltZWvO3DoHZwALq4KzADg&q=%22boat+on+the+keel%22&oq=%22b
oat+on+the+keel%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i8i10i30k1.5984.6273.0.6448.4.4.0.0.0
.0.105.348.3j1.4.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.3.272...0i8i7i10i30k1.0.fDFx
xnxSby0
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
The pictures speak for themselves.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Thus, whenever the word came into English
(MW says ca. 1583), the French word meant 'keel'. MW, BTW, has a
different etymon, carine 'side of a ship' < MF.
"from Medieval French, _submerged part of a hull_",
from Latin carina _hull_, half of a nutshell"
As I understand it, the bottom line is you initially inferred
from the AHD's etymological information "Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'"
you quoted that "the meaning "keel" also applied to "Fr. carène", whereas
it's apparently limited to "Lat. carina" and says nothing of
"carène" - hence your persistence in error.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
[< French _(en) carène_, (on) the keel < Old French _carene_ <
Old Italian _carena_ < Latin _carina_; see *kar-* in App. 1.]
French sources don't agree (see below), and it's just common sense: why
would a verb that means "turn a ship on its side for cleaning" be derived
from the "bottom" meaning of a noun that can also mean "side"?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
"Étymol. et Hist. I. 1. Mar. a) 1246 carenne « quille »
(Propositions des commissaires du roi de France [trad. de traités
passés entre St-Louis et le procureur du podestat de Gênes,
rédigés en lat. médiév. : in carena] ds Vidos, p. 294), attest.
isolée; b) 1552 carene « ensemble de la coque immergée »
(Ronsard, sonnet XLIV ds Les Amours, éd. Laumonier, t. 4, p.
47);"
(http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/car%C3%A8ne)
Irrelevant to the English etymology.
??? How could that be, since the etymon is supposed to be French?
The prehistory of the French word, and its history after the word entered
English, are not relevant to the English etymology.
But the very period in which it entered English is, i.e. 1552 and on
above. M-W says the year is circa 1583, and as you can('t) see, "carene"
already meant "hull" by then.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
AHD did you a favor by
taking it back to its IE root.
Some decades ago I came across an "explanation" of the verb "careen"
which said that it was based on "careen" meaning "keel" and that it came
from the idea that when a ship was careened, tilted on to its side, the
keel became visible.
I didn't follow up that to see how accurate it was.
Not, I'm afraid. More likely also derived
from old Scandinavian and Dutch, kraengen, krengen,
What's your source for that? The OED says,

"corresponds to modern French caréner, earlier cariner, Spanish carenar,
Italian carenare, < French carène, Spanish carena or Italian carena keel
< Latin carīna keel.

"(The precise source of the verb does not appear; it may even have been
< careen n.: the French, Spanish, Italian verb is not in Cotgrave,
Minsheu, Florio.)"

The etymology given for the noun "careen" is from French.

Etymonline says,

'1590s, "to turn a ship on its side" (with the keel exposed, for
inspection, repairs, etc.), from French cariner, literally 'to expose a
ship's keel,' from Middle French carene "keel" (16c.), from Italian
(Genoese dialect) carena, from Latin carina "keel of a ship," also (and
perhaps originally) "nutshell," possibly from PIE root *kar- "hard."'

The sound and meaning seem to fit a Romance source perfectly.
--
Jerry Friedman
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-13 11:24:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
Then what's the BrE word for "careen"? (The -een makes it look like
it came from Irish.) (No, Fr. carène 'keel';
French "carène" means "hull". You may have confused it with Italian
"carena", which does means "keel".
Or I may have believed the etymological information provided by the
American Heritage Dictionary (5th ed.). Fr. carène < Lat. carina 'keel'.
That's just wrong. Didn't your recently advise me not to on rely on
general-purpose dictionaries for the definitions of technical terms
("clitic", IIRC)?
The "carène" is the immersed part of the hull ("coque" in French) and
apparently translates as just "hull" in English, while the "quille" (keel)
https://www.google.fr/search?q=car%C3%A8ne+avec+quille&rlz=1C1CHBF_frFR765FR76
5&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAid7xmdHYAhVLYlAKHSJ1D74Q_AUICig
Post by b***@aol.com
In the AHD's defence, "carenne" (but not "carène") once meant "keel"
in Old French (in 1246), hence maybe the inaccuracy.
If English 'keel' came from anywhere it would be from Dutch 'kiel'.
Or more likely, from a common old Germanic root. (perhaps Saxon)
French 'quille' for 'keel' also derives from Dutch.
I don't think carena has anything to do with it,

Jan
Peter T. Daniels
2018-01-13 14:36:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
If English 'keel' came from anywhere it would be from Dutch 'kiel'.
Or more likely, from a common old Germanic root. (perhaps Saxon)
French 'quille' for 'keel' also derives from Dutch.
I don't think carena has anything to do with it,
Not even beebee is suggesting that it does.
Sam Plusnet
2018-01-16 01:45:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Well if you're going to moan about it you're probably far too late.
Although it probably started as a variation of 'home in', 'hone in'
has been an accepted form since at least the 1960s and was in
use at the New York Times as early as 1967. And it's not as if it's
an absurd development. What are you doing in 'homing in' if not
sharpening your focus?
You don't say you "hone the focus" of a telescope. Honing is for sharp edges.
Bullseyes -- what you home in on -- are not edges, they are points.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
It is quite ridiculous to claim that natural and widely adopted
variations in language are errors. You would cut a vast swathe
through the dictionary if you started to reject usages that
'evolved' in exactly this way.
It's an error.
If "hone in on" is becoming accepted in Standard BrE, it's just another sign of
the debasement of that language -- the same language that has all but forgotten
the subjunctive, for instance. Do you even fail to distinguish "careen" from
"career"?
That is a terrible example, because "careen" doesn't appear
in BrE at all.
It does in context.
It's simply a nautical term and doesn't seem to have moved outside that
context.
--
Sam Plusnet
Peter Young
2018-01-11 10:40:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Nothing wrong with being an old fogey; I'm one too in the respect of a
word being misused.

Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Pt)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 11:57:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Young
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Nothing wrong with being an old fogey; I'm one too in the respect of a
word being misused.
So you respect a word being misused? That doesn't sound fogey-like!

(Hoist upon thine own petard thou art!)
Peter Young
2018-01-11 12:35:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Young
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Nothing wrong with being an old fogey; I'm one too in the respect of a
word being misused.
So you respect a word being misused? That doesn't sound fogey-like!
(Hoist upon thine own petard thou art!)
Ouch!

Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Pt)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Richard Yates
2018-01-11 13:37:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-01-11 16:25:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Cheryl
2018-01-11 16:31:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
I think "hone" is a fairly widely-known word, but I might be basing this
assumption on my own knowledge of it, which might not be as typical of
that of the general population as I assume.
--
Cheryl
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-11 16:33:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
The Google use graph suggests that usage has remained pretty
steady for over a century and there are plenty of hardware stores
offering honing tools and training centres offering to hone ones
skills so I think your estimate is a tad on the pessimistic side.
Paul Wolff
2018-01-11 16:47:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
What it /really/ means is to sharpen with a hone, the hone being a
stone. You hone things 'up' in a figurative sense: I shall certainly
hone up my bidding skills before I join the village bridge club.
--
Paul
Lewis
2018-01-11 20:23:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
What it /really/ means is to sharpen with a hone, the hone being a
stone. You hone things 'up' in a figurative sense: I shall certainly
hone up my bidding skills before I join the village bridge club.
I've never heard hone up, but hone in (to narrow in on) is common.
--
Internet was down last night. Turns out I have two kids. They seem
pretty well-behaved
Tony Cooper
2018-01-11 20:29:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 20:23:01 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
Post by Lewis
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
What it /really/ means is to sharpen with a hone, the hone being a
stone. You hone things 'up' in a figurative sense: I shall certainly
hone up my bidding skills before I join the village bridge club.
I've never heard hone up, but hone in (to narrow in on) is common.
I recognize "hone in on" as not correct, but it's not something that
throws me. I would never correct anyone using it.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Lewis
2018-01-12 06:21:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 20:23:01 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
Post by Lewis
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:37:49 -0800, Richard Yates
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
What it /really/ means is to sharpen with a hone, the hone being a
stone. You hone things 'up' in a figurative sense: I shall certainly
hone up my bidding skills before I join the village bridge club.
I've never heard hone up, but hone in (to narrow in on) is common.
I recognize "hone in on" as not correct, but it's not something that
throws me. I would never correct anyone using it.
Correct or not, it is certainly common. I learned both and have invented
a distinction that works for me, even though I know most authorities
still consider hone in an error. I think that at this point it is far
too common in US English to really be classified as an error.

In my head-canon "home in on" means to get closer to something -- that
is, mathematically, to reduce the radius; "hone in on" is to narrow the
focus -- that is, mathematically, reduce the angle of attention on
something.

So, you might home in on a project while you get a general idea of what
you want to do and how you are going to do it, but then you hone in on
solving it by getting into the details and really coming up with a solid
plan.
--
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great
pleasure." Clarence Darrow
Garrett Wollman
2018-01-11 17:40:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
That is possile for some people. I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"?
Any Boy Scout and most chefs can probably tell you the distinction
between "honing" (straightening the edge, using a steel) and
"sharpening" (reshaping the edge by grinding away material).

I'm pretty sure the original usage cited is just an eggcorn, but it's
a particularly well-establshed one, understandably so given that the
difference between the two nasal consonants is so small.

-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
***@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)
Janet
2018-01-12 01:21:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.

Janet
Richard Tobin
2018-01-12 11:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.

-- Richard
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-12 12:18:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Richard Tobin
2018-01-12 13:07:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.

Kitchen knives are cheap.

-- Richard
Tak To
2018-01-12 16:59:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.

Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-12 20:39:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
And now there are ceramic knives:

<URL:Loading Image...>

<quote>

Stone River Ceramics Knives are manufactured from
the highest quality stabilized zirconium oxide material available in the world.
Each knife features a contoured ergonomically designed
comfort grip black handle for a sure and comfortable grip.
The blades are meticulously edged to provide years of regular service
without the need of sharpening.

Benefits of Stone River Ceramic knives:

Non-stick blade
Antibacterial surface
Ergonomically Contoured Comfort Grip Handles
Zirconium oxide blades harder than any material second only to diamonds
Ceramic Blade stays sharp 10-12 times longer than conventional steel knives
Rust free Non corrosive
Easy cleanup
</quote>

<URL:http://www.theceramicknifestore.com/product/ceramic-kitchen-knife-set-white/>

Some of those benefits also are shared by the Harbor Freight version
for somewhat less cash.
<URL:https://www.harborfreight.com/household/kitchen/6-in-ceramic-chefs-knife-61443.html>

And then there's the color opportunity:
<URL:Loading Image...>


/dps
Ken Blake
2018-01-12 21:17:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
<URL:http://www.theceramicknifestore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/SRG43CKW.jpg>
<quote>
Stone River Ceramics Knives are manufactured from
the highest quality stabilized zirconium oxide material available in the world.
Each knife features a contoured ergonomically designed
comfort grip black handle for a sure and comfortable grip.
The blades are meticulously edged to provide years of regular service
without the need of sharpening.
Non-stick blade
Antibacterial surface
Ergonomically Contoured Comfort Grip Handles
Zirconium oxide blades harder than any material second only to diamonds
Ceramic Blade stays sharp 10-12 times longer than conventional steel knives
Rust free Non corrosive
Easy cleanup
</quote>
All of the above are true of ceramic knives. However, as I understand
it, they brea
Snidely
2018-01-13 08:29:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday or thereabouts, Ken Blake declared ...
Post by Ken Blake
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
<URL:http://www.theceramicknifestore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/SRG43CKW.jpg>
<quote>
Stone River Ceramics Knives are manufactured from
the highest quality stabilized zirconium oxide material available in the
world. Each knife features a contoured ergonomically designed
comfort grip black handle for a sure and comfortable grip.
The blades are meticulously edged to provide years of regular service
without the need of sharpening.
Non-stick blade
Antibacterial surface
Ergonomically Contoured Comfort Grip Handles
Zirconium oxide blades harder than any material second only to diamonds
Ceramic Blade stays sharp 10-12 times longer than conventional steel
knives Rust free Non corrosive
Easy cleanup
</quote>
All of the above are true of ceramic knives. However, as I understand
it, they break easily, and I wouldn't want to have any.
I have one of the Harbor Freight ones (the paring knife, actually) and
had no problems keeping it intact. It's in a box, now, because I'm not
running my own kitchen.

/dps "yes, I see what I did"
--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-13 12:06:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
<URL:http://www.theceramicknifestore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/SRG43CKW.jpg>
<quote>
Stone River Ceramics Knives are manufactured from
the highest quality stabilized zirconium oxide material available in the world.
Each knife features a contoured ergonomically designed
comfort grip black handle for a sure and comfortable grip.
The blades are meticulously edged to provide years of regular service
without the need of sharpening.
Non-stick blade
Antibacterial surface
Ergonomically Contoured Comfort Grip Handles
Zirconium oxide blades harder than any material second only to diamonds
Ceramic Blade stays sharp 10-12 times longer than conventional steel knives
Rust free Non corrosive
Easy cleanup
</quote>
All of the above are true of ceramic knives. However, as I understand
it, they break easily, and I wouldn't want to have any.
You're not supposed to use them for digging up the garden or
excavating toast stuck in the toaster! Although thinking about
it they'd probably be the better choice for the latter!
Tak To
2018-01-14 23:43:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
<URL:http://www.theceramicknifestore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/SRG43CKW.jpg>
<quote>
Stone River Ceramics Knives are manufactured from
the highest quality stabilized zirconium oxide material available in the world.
Each knife features a contoured ergonomically designed
comfort grip black handle for a sure and comfortable grip.
The blades are meticulously edged to provide years of regular service
without the need of sharpening.
Non-stick blade
Antibacterial surface
Ergonomically Contoured Comfort Grip Handles
Zirconium oxide blades harder than any material second only to diamonds
Ceramic Blade stays sharp 10-12 times longer than conventional steel knives
Rust free Non corrosive
Easy cleanup
</quote>
All of the above are true of ceramic knives. However, as I understand
it, they break easily, and I wouldn't want to have any.
We had a couple of ceramics knives. They were gifts.
Both of them eventually eventually had chips along the edge.
The strange thing was that we have never witnessed the
material breaking. Every time we discovered a new chip, it
was right after the knives going through the dishwasher. We
suspect it had to do with the blades being pushed by the
jets of water and hitting the rack.

Another odd thing was that we were never able to find the
broken off bits in the filter of the dishwasher. We surmised
that they might have been shattered into fine powder.

So we stopped using them. Relatives who received the same
gifts reported chipping as well, but I never asked them if
they observed the same connection with the dishwasher.

This is just one brand of ceramic knives made in China. I
have no experience with other brands.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
RH Draney
2018-01-15 00:24:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tak To
We had a couple of ceramics knives. They were gifts.
Both of them eventually eventually had chips along the edge.
The strange thing was that we have never witnessed the
material breaking. Every time we discovered a new chip, it
was right after the knives going through the dishwasher. We
suspect it had to do with the blades being pushed by the
jets of water and hitting the rack.
Another odd thing was that we were never able to find the
broken off bits in the filter of the dishwasher. We surmised
that they might have been shattered into fine powder.
So we stopped using them. Relatives who received the same
gifts reported chipping as well, but I never asked them if
they observed the same connection with the dishwasher.
This is just one brand of ceramic knives made in China. I
have no experience with other brands.
I had the tip of one blade break off when I tried to use it to prise
apart a pair of frozen hamburger patties....

The usual instructions that come with ceramic blades is to use them for
slicing, not for chopping...with some foods the distinction between the
two actions is not clear-cut....r
Lewis
2018-01-12 21:54:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tak To
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Yes, probably. Assuming they slice any tomatoes.
Kitchen knives are cheap.
Today's home kitchen knives are typically made from stainless
steel, which can hold the shape of an edge better than
traditional high carbon steel knifes. They don't get dull
as fast, but are harder to sharpen, and thus not meant to be
sharpened at home. They probably don't need to be sharpened
at all if used properly.
Only until recently professional chefs preferred high carbon
steels that are easy to sharpened but need to be sharpened
more frequently. Traditionally, knives did not come sharpened
to the finest possible edge and chefs had to "start" a
blade.
And they are fantastic knives if handled properly.
--
I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-01-12 15:19:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 04:18:39 -0800 (PST), Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
What are they going to do then? Buy a new one every time they find
it tough going slicing a tomato?
Perhaps they will sharpen it, with a knife sharpener.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Tony Cooper
2018-01-12 15:04:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
Both older grandsons have been taught how to sharpen a knife and have
been sharpening theirs for a couple of years now. The knives in
question are filleting knives used to filet fish.

Both are avid fishermen. Their mother insisted early-on that if they
were going to catch fish, they were going to learn how to filet their
own fish.

This is, of course, anecdotal and has nothing to do with what "most"
people do.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-12 21:17:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
Both older grandsons have been taught how to sharpen a knife and have
been sharpening theirs for a couple of years now. The knives in
question are filleting knives used to filet fish.
Both are avid fishermen. Their mother insisted early-on that if they
were going to catch fish, they were going to learn how to filet their
own fish.
Filleting fish really requires very sharp knives.
It is also a dangerous profession, for that reason.
I know all about it, I saw about it on TV.
Post by Tony Cooper
This is, of course, anecdotal and has nothing to do with what "most"
people do.
For me honing is not the same as sharpening.
It is a two stage proces,
first you sharpen the knife or chisel, or whatever.
(typically with a stone, or nowadays a diamond plate)
then you hone it to get it really sharp.
(perhaps with a leather strop, or a special steel)

The sharpening leaves microscopic roughness,
honing smoothes that to obtain a really sharp edge.
In other words, you can't hone unless it's already sharp,

Jan
Janet
2018-01-12 15:59:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <p3a647$22bo$***@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>, ***@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
says...
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
Anyone who cooks, gardens sews or does woodwork almost certainly will
have to sharpen a blade.

The rest had better hone their wits, or at least their sense of
humour.

Janet
b***@aol.com
2018-01-12 16:15:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
I asked a passing boy scout, and he didn't know the word. I doubt most
people born this century will ever sharpen a knife.
Anyone who cooks, gardens sews or does woodwork almost certainly will
have to sharpen a blade.
The rest had better hone their wits, or at least their sense of
humour.
Particularly so if they aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Post by Janet
Janet
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-12 20:25:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
I wonder how many pople actually know
"hone" to mean "sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to be
widely known.
'Unplugged woodworking' is quite fashionable again.
Any fool can use a power tool.
Planing and chiseling by hand is true craftsmanship.
It requires well sharpened tools.

There is no shortage of howto books,

Jan
Peter Moylan
2018-01-14 12:46:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-14 14:17:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
Richard Tobin
2018-01-14 16:55:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.

e.g.

http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html

-- Richard
Katy Jennison
2018-01-15 08:04:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.
e.g.
http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html
-- Richard
I learnt it as "sharpen" WIWAL, and I don't think I've ever heard it
with "hone", even though I'd have known what it meant.
--
Katy Jennison
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-15 09:59:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.
e.g.
http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html
-- Richard
I learnt it as "sharpen" WIWAL, and I don't think I've ever heard it
with "hone", even though I'd have known what it meant.
The original Harry and Odetta version has a 'hone' in it,
as a reinforcer for sharpen,

Jan
Katy Jennison
2018-01-15 10:13:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.
e.g.
http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html
-- Richard
I learnt it as "sharpen" WIWAL, and I don't think I've ever heard it
with "hone", even though I'd have known what it meant.
The original Harry and Odetta version has a 'hone' in it,
as a reinforcer for sharpen,
"Original"? They recorded it in 1960. I first heard (and learnt) the
song in the late 1940s.
--
Katy Jennison
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-15 10:55:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
True, but the English lyric dates from the 1940s, so it is maybe
not the most pertinent example in a discussion about the
vocabulary of current youth.
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.
e.g.
http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html
-- Richard
I learnt it as "sharpen" WIWAL, and I don't think I've ever heard it
with "hone", even though I'd have known what it meant.
The original Harry and Odetta version has a 'hone' in it,
as a reinforcer for sharpen,
"Original"? They recorded it in 1960. I first heard (and learnt) the
song in the late 1940s.
Eh, there are several Harry Belafonte versions,

Jan
Jerry Friedman
2018-01-15 19:16:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[Hole in my bucket]
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Richard Tobin
And if you look for the lyrics on the web, many versions have only
"sharpen", presumably precisely because "hone" is not a word children
are likely to know.
e.g.
http://nurseryrhymescollections.com/lyrics/theres-a-hole-in-my-bucket.html
-- Richard
I learnt it as "sharpen" WIWAL, and I don't think I've ever heard it
with "hone", even though I'd have known what it meant.
The original Harry and Odetta version has a 'hone' in it,
as a reinforcer for sharpen,
"Original"? They recorded it in 1960. I first heard (and learnt) the
song in the late 1940s.
Eh, there are several Harry Belafonte versions,
The earliest reference to it I see at Google Books is that a character
sings it up to "a hole!" in /Starting Point/, by C. Day-Lewis (1938).

https://books.google.com/books?id=uIVaAAAAMAAJ&q=%22a+hole+in+my+bucket%22&dq=%22a+hole+in+my+bucket%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwie_fuA1trYAhUG0FMKHWjoAaQQ6AEIKTAA

http://bit.ly/2rbLGeN
--
Jerry Friedman
J. J. Lodder
2018-01-14 21:22:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'.
But you are right: 'then hone it dear Henry'
is much better in all respects.

Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,

Jan
Peter Moylan
2018-01-15 00:41:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'.
But you are right: 'then hone it dear Henry'
is much better in all respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.

Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2018-01-15 19:18:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean "sharpen"? I
think that in the BrE-world that would be a small/tiny minority of
the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd expect it to
be widely  known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket". I don't
think that song is especially aimed at people who understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'.
But you are right: 'then hone it dear Henry'
is much better in all respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
The version I learned had, e.g., "Then mend it dear Willy, dear Willy,
you silly."
--
Jerry Friedman
Theodore Heise
2018-01-15 22:15:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my
head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
Post by Jerry Friedman
The version I learned had, e.g., "Then mend it dear Willy, dear
Willy, you silly."
Sure, but that would have been a different verse. Mending would
have been for the hole itself. Sharpening/honing was for the axe
(the one that was too dull to cut the straw that was too long for
use to mend the hole).
--
Ted Heise <***@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA
Tony Cooper
2018-01-15 22:35:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:15:38 +0000 (UTC), Theodore Heise
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-15 23:31:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:15:38 +0000 (UTC), Theodore Heise
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
--
I think not. Harry Belafonte & Odetta's 1960 charting single lays
claim to that honour. It's certainly the version that most people
will have heard.
Tony Cooper
2018-01-16 00:47:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:31:58 -0800 (PST), Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:15:38 +0000 (UTC), Theodore Heise
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
--
I think not. Harry Belafonte & Odetta's 1960 charting single lays
claim to that honour. It's certainly the version that most people
will have heard.
You've succumbed to "glancing".

The phrasing "for me" should have cut that comment off at the pass.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Katy Jennison
2018-01-15 23:39:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:15:38 +0000 (UTC), Theodore Heise
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
If it continues, I'd just like to say that I've always wondered, right
from the first time I heard the song, how effective a straw would
actually be for mending a hole in a bucket. And no, I wasn't thinking
of a paper or a plastic straw (we didn't have plastic strawa WIWAL).
--
Katy Jennison
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-15 23:53:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Theodore Heise
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
If it continues, I'd just like to say that I've always wondered, right
from the first time I heard the song, how effective a straw would
actually be for mending a hole in a bucket. And no, I wasn't thinking
of a paper or a plastic straw (we didn't have plastic strawa WIWAL).
I think it's a binder/filler for the goop that makes the patch
(pitch, perhaps, or tar or clay or mud that will harden enough
not to soak through before the job is done.)
Pitch up!

(I learned the song not from a record,
but from sing-alongs at the church's potluck dinners.)

/dps
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-01-16 00:08:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:15:38 +0000 (UTC), Theodore Heise
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
If this debate continues, I'll have to find my Burl Ives recording of
the song. His is the "official" version for me.
If it continues, I'd just like to say that I've always wondered, right
from the first time I heard the song, how effective a straw would
actually be for mending a hole in a bucket. And no, I wasn't thinking
of a paper or a plastic straw (we didn't have plastic strawa WIWAL).
Well it does ok as roofing! But probably best to think of an old style
wooden bucket with leaky seams rather than a modern one piece
bucket with a gash in it.
Jerry Friedman
2018-01-16 00:28:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Theodore Heise
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:18:21 -0700,
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Janet
I wonder how many pople actually know "hone" to mean
"sharpen"? I think that in the BrE-world that would be a
small/tiny minority of the population.
You surprise me. To me it's such a common meaning I'd
expect it to be widely? known.
The word occurs in the song "There's a hole in the bucket".
I don't think that song is especially aimed at people who
understand rare words.
I've only heard with 'then sharpen it, dear Henry'. But you
are right: 'then hone it dear Henry' is much better in all
respects.
Too late to inform Henry/Harry, I'm afraid,
Both words occur in the version that's now running around my
head.
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry,
Hone it.
Me too.
Post by Jerry Friedman
The version I learned had, e.g., "Then mend it dear Willy, dear
Willy, you silly."
Sure, but that would have been a different verse. Mending would
have been for the hole itself. Sharpening/honing was for the axe
(the one that was too dull to cut the straw that was too long for
use to mend the hole).
Yes. I went back to the first verse because I didn't remember whether
the version I sort of learned had "sharpen it" or "hone it" or both.

I still don't know how to mend a hole in a bucket with a straw. People
at the Mudcat offer these possibilities, partly based on the idea that
wet straw swells up.

The hole is small enough for one straw, and the swollen straw makes a
tolerable seal.

The "hole" is a gap between wooden staves, and the straw goes in
horizontally.

The bucket is made out of straw--compare thatched roofs.

https://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=122109
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter Young
2018-01-11 17:48:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Yates
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently,
though. Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is
degenerating these days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
I agree that it is an error, but an interesting one - actually a
mondegreen. People have misheard "home in" as "hone in" because they
can make sense of that word in context. When you hone a knife you are
progressively narrowing and refining the edge to a single line; when
you home in on a location you are progressively narrowing and refining
an area to a single point.
Well, the shouldn't of done that! Just as they shouldn't have written
that.

Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Pt)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Sam Plusnet
2018-01-16 01:37:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cheryl
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:09:49 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a
significant
national security issue, Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to
be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
To me, that usage of 'honed' is an error - probably a confusion with
'homed in'. I think I've been seeing 'honed in' more frequently, though.
Perhaps I should moan a bit about how language is degenerating these
days, but that makes me feel like an old fogey.
Just wait. Your handcart will be cancelled, and you'll have to do your
travelling in a handbasket.
--
Sam Plusnet
Peter Moylan
2018-01-11 10:51:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
I'm impressed that the Guardian picked it up. In my experience
journalists frequently make this error.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
John Dunlop
2018-01-11 18:00:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
“He honed [sic] in on this issue of blackmail as being a significant
national security issue,” Simpson said.
Why the "[sic]"? Honed is not a word I use myself, but it seems to be
used in a normal way here. Am I wrong?
Normal for many people, maybe, including and possibly thanks to Bush,
but still generally regarded as an error. Even the MWDEU, condemned by
some here for its descriptivism, recommends "home in on" instead.

But perhaps "hone in on" will become acceptable. MWDEU's entry includes
this tidbit: "we received a phone call not long ago from an articulate
and obviously well-educated woman who had read 'home in on' in the
newspaper and wanted to know if it was an error for 'hone in on'".

A blast from the past, here's John Lawler, linguist and erstwhile AUEer,
defending his use of "hone in on":

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.fan.cecil-adams/AZCfZgdvSaU/zTtNh9OgmP0J

https://tinyurl.com/y8kfrejw
--
John
Loading...