| User | Post |
|
10:51PM Sep-27-09
| Hansen
| | 中國上海 | |
| Member | posts 19 | |
|
|
|
4:23PM Nov-05-09
| lux rationis
| | |
| Member | posts 63 | |
|
|
Hanson said:As William Safire noted in March, when the president said that he wanted the American people to have “a fulsome accounting” for his stimulus program, he meant full, whereas to punctilious authorities the word means disgusting, excessive, insincere.
Here again, I'd like to point out that most words do not have a discrete meaning, but rather a range of possible meanings that is clarified by context. "Fulsome" originally meant "characterized by abundance." Connotation, more than denotation, is the problem in the cited example. While most modern usage has inclined toward the connotative value of "insincere" or "excessive," the original meaning with its more positive connotation seems to be reasserting itself, according to the Merriam-Webster On-line Dictionary. Within this context, "fulsome" simply means "copious" or "full and well developed" and fits the context: the President wanted "a full accounting" for his stimulus program. Encoders need to be wary of ambiguity, but decoders, too, need to be flexible and consider the full range of possible meanings, not just the one that first strikes them.
|
|
|
5:02PM Nov-09-09
| martha
| | martha | |
| Admin
| posts 817 | |
|
|
Hmmm…I think in this particular case, "fulsome" is unfortunate, though. I know I laughed when I read it, anyway. American Heritage has a note about this word as a usage problem. http://education.yahoo.com/ref…..ry/fulsome
|
|
|
4:41PM Feb-12-10
| johng423
| | |
| Member | posts 127 | |
|
|
Some people reason that if "flammable" means combustible, then "inflammable" must mean the opposite and might erroneously assume certain materials are fire-safe when they actually are not (the dictionaries I've consulted say it also means combustible). Is this another example of a phantonym?
And how about the ruckus a while back when a public figure used the word "niggardly" and it was misunderstood?
|
|
|
11:51AM Feb-22-10
| Grant Barrett
| | San Diego, California | |
| Admin
| posts 1212 |   
|
|
|
Inflammable is indeed a pretty good example of a "phantonym."
|
|
|
11:59AM Feb-22-10
| Kaa
| | Atlanta, Georgia | |
| Member | posts 43 |  
|
|
|
What about "spendthrift" as a phantonym? It LOOKS like it ought to mean someone who SAVES money, not someone who SPENDS wantonly. And, thanks to Grant and Martha, I realized today while driving to work that I've been using the word incorrectly for years.
|
|
|
12:07PM Feb-22-10
| Grant Barrett
| | San Diego, California | |
| Admin
| posts 1212 |   
|
|
|
Exactly, Kaa! As the caller noted, it definitely does not look like what it means.
|
|
|
9:22PM Feb-23-10
| tromboniator
| | |
| Member | posts 215 | |
|
|
There is no confusion about the verb inflame, is there? It seems clearly to indicate ignition in a figurative sense if not a literal one: The finger became inflamed where the thorn had pierced it; The professor's passionate lectures inflame students' curiosity about the subject. Inflammation seems clear as well.
Peter
|
|
|
9:07AM Feb-24-10
| Glenn
| | |
| Admin
| posts 1148 | |
|
|
Post edited 9:08AM – Feb-24-10 by Glenn
tromboniator said:
There is no confusion about the verb inflame, is there? It seems clearly to indicate ignition in a figurative sense if not a literal one: The finger became inflamed where the thorn had pierced it; The professor's passionate lectures inflame students' curiosity about the subject. Inflammation seems clear as well.
There are other prefixed verbs that are near synonyms with their unprefixed couterparts. In several cases, the prefixed version has the potential, but not always the reality, of ambiguity. (e.g. resolve≈solve and not "to solve again")
|
|