This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1thorold
I just noticed in passing in an LT review the expression: "... is written with a modern flare". I suppose freefall parachutists might be able to use a flare for skywriting, but it sounds pretty dangerous, and you wouldn't really want to start with "Longtemps je me suis couché de bonne heure..."
An obvious and trivial error, of course, but it set me thinking about "flare" and "flair" - neither of them is really an obvious word. So I looked them up, of course.
"Flare" seems to have started out as a verb (etymology obscure, according to the OED) meaning to spread out (esp. hair) or bulge, it only became associated with fire in the 17th century. The OED credits Sir Walter Scott with being the first to use it in print as a noun. "Flare" as a pyrotechnic device is late-19th century.
"Flair" comes from a French verb meaning to smell: In the middle ages, a "flair" in English was simply a bad odour, but the word fell out of use until late Victorian times, when it was reintroduced from modern French, coming to mean a special perceptiveness or sensitivity.
An obvious and trivial error, of course, but it set me thinking about "flare" and "flair" - neither of them is really an obvious word. So I looked them up, of course.
"Flare" seems to have started out as a verb (etymology obscure, according to the OED) meaning to spread out (esp. hair) or bulge, it only became associated with fire in the 17th century. The OED credits Sir Walter Scott with being the first to use it in print as a noun. "Flare" as a pyrotechnic device is late-19th century.
"Flair" comes from a French verb meaning to smell: In the middle ages, a "flair" in English was simply a bad odour, but the word fell out of use until late Victorian times, when it was reintroduced from modern French, coming to mean a special perceptiveness or sensitivity.
2Novak
>1 thorold: Yes.. .. Very snappy :-)
Well, yes I guess inflammatory language is a hot topic. To my shame I have never noticed that they were two different words, I must have interchanged them all my life. In my guitar days when I used to sport them and the volume from my speakers used to make them flap, I can safely say that they were always worn in pairs.. .. .. .. so let's say one of each?
Well, yes I guess inflammatory language is a hot topic. To my shame I have never noticed that they were two different words, I must have interchanged them all my life. In my guitar days when I used to sport them and the volume from my speakers used to make them flap, I can safely say that they were always worn in pairs.. .. .. .. so let's say one of each?
4darrow
I am more concerned about use of the word 'modern'. A nebulous word that should be avoided. I have a 1930s book titled "The Modern Encyclopaedia". When was it no longer modern?
6PhaedraB
I object to people who say they don't like modern art while pointing to something that's more than a century old.
7thorold
>4 darrow:
I think I've already complained here about an OUP book called Railways in modern India, published about ten years ago, and dealing only with the pre-1948 period. For historians, anything more recent than "medieval" is "modern", apparently.
I think I've already complained here about an OUP book called Railways in modern India, published about ten years ago, and dealing only with the pre-1948 period. For historians, anything more recent than "medieval" is "modern", apparently.
8Novak
>7 thorold:
This is getting tricky. If such is the case then I, myself, am modern? I can hear a prodigious pack of offspring howling.. .. ..
This is getting tricky. If such is the case then I, myself, am modern? I can hear a prodigious pack of offspring howling.. .. ..
9eromsted
>7 thorold:
"For historians, anything more recent than 'medieval' is 'modern', apparently."
This is correct, e.g.:
"The Journal of Modern History is recognized as the leading American journal for the study of European intellectual, political, and cultural history. The Journal's geographical and temporal scope-the history of Europe since the Renaissance-makes it unique: the JMH explores not only events and movements in specific countries, but also broader questions that span particular times and places."
"For historians, anything more recent than 'medieval' is 'modern', apparently."
This is correct, e.g.:
"The Journal of Modern History is recognized as the leading American journal for the study of European intellectual, political, and cultural history. The Journal's geographical and temporal scope-the history of Europe since the Renaissance-makes it unique: the JMH explores not only events and movements in specific countries, but also broader questions that span particular times and places."
10ScarletBea
Well, they caused the problem, the people who started using 'modern' all those years ago.
Then came 'post modern'.... and then 'contemporary'... and what will come after?
Maybe we need to create new words for them - after all, people in the Middle Ages or the Renaissance didn't call their art that, all those words came later. It's time to rediscover language to time-stamp art :)
Then came 'post modern'.... and then 'contemporary'... and what will come after?
Maybe we need to create new words for them - after all, people in the Middle Ages or the Renaissance didn't call their art that, all those words came later. It's time to rediscover language to time-stamp art :)
11Novak
Oh, I do love this corner. Nowhere but here could we describe “modern” as inflammatory language. :)
Can there be a more modern word than now?
Can there be a more modern word than now?
12darrow
I think I have found a good use for the word 'modern'. In the UK we have a political party launched as New Labour. The party elite have decided that the 'New' is old and it should be dropped. They should name it Modern Labour because it will never get old.
14Novak
I never vote so I never moan. I can cope with "New" or "Modern".. .. So where do they get the "Labour" bit?
It suggests hard work or women screaming, who'd want to vote for that?
It suggests hard work or women screaming, who'd want to vote for that?
15darrow
I think they should change the labour part too. They were the party of choice for 'working class' people, so it made sense then.
16thorold
>14 Novak:,>15 darrow:
Even if "Labour" and "Conservative" don't really describe what the parties do any more, it does at least give voters a way of remembering which is which. Imagine if they were like utility companies or banks and went off to commission some PR firm to pick a name that has no negative associations - Abaga and Watuto or something like that. They would have to come with clearly distinguishable policies at election time so that voters could make an informed decision. It would never work.
Even if "Labour" and "Conservative" don't really describe what the parties do any more, it does at least give voters a way of remembering which is which. Imagine if they were like utility companies or banks and went off to commission some PR firm to pick a name that has no negative associations - Abaga and Watuto or something like that. They would have to come with clearly distinguishable policies at election time so that voters could make an informed decision. It would never work.
19CliffordDorset
But then, are the Democrats against the Republic, and the Republicans anti-democratic?
In Britain, the only rational choice is the Monster Raving Loony Party, but I suspect most people imagine they're just more of the same.
In Britain, the only rational choice is the Monster Raving Loony Party, but I suspect most people imagine they're just more of the same.
20Novak
Were the Monster-Raving-Loony-Party the ones who complained 'cos there is only one Monopolies Commission?
21thorold
>19 CliffordDorset:
The Official Monster Raving Loony Party, I believe (since we are in Pedants' Corner)!
The Official Monster Raving Loony Party, I believe (since we are in Pedants' Corner)!
22Novak
Imagine a coalition with David Cameron and Lord Sutch. Too late now but what a wonderful situation that might have been.. .. .. (Sigh!)
ETA spelling.
ETA spelling.
24thorold
>23 darrow:
Sadly, I don't think British election law allows candidates to be elected posthumously.
Sadly, I don't think British election law allows candidates to be elected posthumously.
25Novak
>24 thorold:
You'd never guess from looking at them though, would you?
You'd never guess from looking at them though, would you?
26SimonW11
>9 eromsted: "Since the Renaissance" is not the same as "more recent than medieval".
27thorold
>27 thorold:
FWIW, Wikipedia assigns the Renaissance to the modern period (the early modern period, to be more precise). But I don't imagine it's very easy to establish exactly when the Renaissance started or finished.
FWIW, Wikipedia assigns the Renaissance to the modern period (the early modern period, to be more precise). But I don't imagine it's very easy to establish exactly when the Renaissance started or finished.
28dtw42
>22 Novak:: *Sutch ;-)
29Novak
>28 dtw42: Thanks. Can't believe I did that. Us Lords should be more careful. :o)
30urania1
>26 SimonW11:
No Renaissance any more. The term Renaissance has been replaced by the flammable phrase Early Modern.
No Renaissance any more. The term Renaissance has been replaced by the flammable phrase Early Modern.
31CliffordDorset
22/29:
I think we should give the good Lord his full name of 'Screaming Lord Sutch', although if he's screaming now, a fathom of earth is attenuating his efforts. We shouldn't mock the man or his Monster Raving Loony Party - remember that a good deal of his manifesto was actually made law by other parties. And the party is still finding the funds to put up candidates ...
I think we should give the good Lord his full name of 'Screaming Lord Sutch', although if he's screaming now, a fathom of earth is attenuating his efforts. We shouldn't mock the man or his Monster Raving Loony Party - remember that a good deal of his manifesto was actually made law by other parties. And the party is still finding the funds to put up candidates ...
