warning them that the company would be less likely to do business with those among them who also marketed their goods online.
Hmmmm! Verrrry interesting. Now, why is stuff that is on sale at Blankstore.com online is not on sale or even available in the real, local Blank store?
Max, I had just as hard a time trying to figure out the meaning of antidisintermediation as I always have with antidisestablishmentarianism (hi, Bingley). I have to think, "Ok, mediation I understand. Intermediation is understandable. Disintermediation: oh yeah, against intermediation. Antidisintermediation: way too big of a stretch, but ok, I followed it all." That last one is like Bingley's story of two positives making a negative: "yeah, yeah"; but in this case it's two negatives making a positive. Seems to me it's the equivalent of saying against against intermediaries: ree-dick-i-lous!
The person who invented that ten dollar word* should be slapped in the face with a sock full of wet mud. This ridiculous word reminds me of the business madness depicted in the hilarious film "Office Space."
Bingley's story of two positives making a negative: "yeah, yeah";
When I saw this story posted I didn't understand how that makes a negative, but I didn't respond. I still don't understand it. The only double positive that I can think of that makes a negative is the sarcastic "yeah, right". Could you perhaps explain the other example?
that's exactly it... the two phrases have a similar meaning (depending on inflection, of course; it's not a "Yeah, Yeah!"(as in Hear, Hear!) but rather a scornful High-Low sound, perhaps even accompanied with a dramatic rolling of the eyes (not that i would know about these things)). perhaps "yeah, right", though, is a tad more combactive™.
What is this? The New Beatles™? Sign me up, Bean! Grand idea! Maybe we'll replace The Backstreet Boys! I'll be John; you can be Paul. Now we need a George and a Ringo. Hey--in this forum, we can make a white album!
antidisintermediation is a term used to describe the preservation of intermediary positions
This is, of course, a disingenuous (or would you prefer genuous?) definition, since the description goes on to point out that what it *really means is opposition to the idea that the middleman should be avoided. Leaving unmentioned the fact that this puts the antidisintermediationists in the position of the labor unions that decreed that the fireman was still needed on a railroad train crew even into the age of diesel engines I would only say that to be opposed to someone else's opposition is not the same thing as being for the thing opposed. To take the attitude that they are indistinguishable would be the equivalent of saying that the phrase "not unkind" was identical to the term "kind".
This has become, as Bingley points out a hoary old favourite, but if one bothers to check the situation out of which it sprang one will see that there is a sense to *it, too.
to be opposed to someone else's opposition is not the same thing as being for the thing opposed. Definitely. I was using expediency to try and point out the awkwardness of the word.
This just shows the weakness of the logical multiple negative as opposed to the vigor of the emphatic multiple negative. My classic examples being I couldn't fail to disagree with you less to illustrate the former (I have been using that phrase for more than ten years and I *still don't know what it means) and I don't like to have to hurt nobody without they ain't no chance of no gold in it for me the latter, which leaves no doubt in any but the most obstinate curmudgeon's mind as to the meaning.
but then there is pseudoantidisestablishmentarianism, undoubtedly coined by the antifloccinaucinihilipilification forces wanting to get the "honor" (honorificabilitudinitatibus?) back.
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site.
Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to
hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.
I'll be John; you can be Paul.
