Are their any words that are their own antonym? Seems contradictory, I know, but it struck me one day long ago, when someone said something to me that, based on the interpretation of a particular word in the sentence, could have had its meaning turned on its head. Secondly, what is the name to describe a word that has this quality? Thanks.
A recent use of the word, 'wicked' amongst teenagers comes to mind. In their usage it means the opposite of its original meaning.To be 'wicked' is to be super cool and is a good thing to be.
I don't know the name for this phenomenon, but I can think of one more example: "sanction" as a verb means to approve, while "sanction" as a noun is a ban.
As for the current meaning of "wicked," I suspect that's an extrapolation of the 1970s' "bad."
In the same vein, there are words that seem to be antonyms but are in fact synonyms, such as "flammable" and "inflammable."
Hope someone knows what these two groups of words are called.
linguaphile
I initiated a discussion on this very topic on another website (Atlantic Monthly's Word Fugitives) and I think that we eventually settled on enantiodromic to describe such a word; from enantiodromia, which means the changing of something into its opposite -- a process that most such words obviously have to go through to arrive at having two opposite meanings!
Some of the suggestions were: Janus words, auto-antonyms, contronyms, antagonyms and schizonyms. Here is a link to that discussion, which itself includes links to examples and other discussions:
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/fugitives/diametrical.htm
here are a couple of other examples: overlook (or oversee), peruse (hi Jeff!) and anabasis (military advance or retreat).
and here's one that has certainly gone in contrary directions: sanguine, which can mean 'bloodthirsty' or 'optimistic'.
...by the way, an example of such a word which is not enantiodromic is cleave, which is often given as an example of a contronym [my personal choice amongst these terms] but which actually evolved from two separate and unique words that came to have the same spelling!
Perhaps we could look at phrases which are their own antonym such as "begs the question". Oh no, let's not!
In many cases, emotionally charged words, in the course of their history, change over to the opposite sense, e.g. "terrific". So the opposite significations are not really simultaneous. Antonyms, in the strict sense, are those that are actually used in opposition in a phrase. You can't say, of a novel, "the plot is terrific, but the style is terrific."
I was under the impression that the use of wicked to mean good was something that was common in West African languages and which got translated into English use by African Americans. I thought that, although it has recently become more widespread in use, it has long been used by African Americans and Black West Indians. Is this true and, if so, is it also true for Spanish and Portuguese speaking descendents of Black slavery.
Rats! Cleave has always been my favorite among these words and now I learn that it isn't one. Can you give the derivation of the two?
the etymologies are tortuous but they both come through Old High German; one from kleben to stick, and the other from klioban to split.
AnnaStrophic wrote:
>In the same vein, there are words that seem to be antonyms but are in fact synonyms, such as "flammable" and "inflammable."
This happens because the prefix in- is usually thought of as "not" but also can mean in/into/upon. Here again, there were two root words from Latin: flammare and inflammare.
Other pseudo-antonyms are ravel/unravel, bone/debone and loose/unloose. Ravel is quite interesting in as it can mean disentangle or unravel, or it can mean confuse or entangle -- it's a contronym as well!
Cheer up, sholmes: you can still use your favorite "cleave" as a shining example of a contranym.
tsuwm correctly stated that the word is not enantiodromic, not having gone through the procedure. However, it is still a legitimate and worthwhile contranym, antagonym or Janus Word (kudos to my friend Richard Lederer).
Patatty
Well, this is what's known as a quibble: you won't find the two meanings in one dictionary entry as two senses of the same word -- they really are two distinct words and therefore should hardly qualify as a "word that's its own antonym". But you're right, in as much all the extant lists of antagonyms etc. include cleave. vox populi.
A gracious quibble, tsuwm, and as a newbie, I acknowlege my understanding of the distinction (WITH a difference, as we legal types are too fond of saying) to have been increased.
Pari passu.
BTW, Michael, I did access the URL you recommended (atlantic)after posting this message, and your discussion of "peruse" triggers my thoughts of another contranym candidate: scan?
I don't know if this is relevant, but the word 'draw', when used in the context of 'drawing the curtains' (or drawing the blinds) seems to me to be used to reverse whatever position they are currently in. So if the curtains have been drawn back, then you use 'draw the curtains' to close them, and vice versa. (At least, this is what my Mummy taught me to do. Don't you dare say that Momma was wrong!)
Another with two uses, though they are not necessarily directly opposed:
discrimination: bigotry, or fine discernment.
cheer
the sunshine warrior
I remembered what sparked my interest in this topic in the first place. A book titled "Dictionary of Common Fallacies" has an entry something like "there are no words that are their own opposite", and an example was 'let', as in Shakespearian terms it means 'prevent', thus Hamlet: "I'll make a ghost of any man who lets me" (go after his father's apparition).
Tergiversator -
Did you catch Buckley's column today on the Miami mess?
Quote: "... so is it true of the majority of the American people, who can live with the consequences of the end of the cold war without fearing, in the case of Elian Gonzalez, that tergiversation is in the saddle, and we are betraying Walt Whitman"
Not every day you see that word in the news.
max,
I suspected that this was what you were asking, but what fun would it have been for me to assume as much?
actually, cleave is the only word(s) I know of that exhibits this (possibly) unique quality. If there are others, I eagerly await adding them to my collection of contranyms (with an asterisk, of course).
I'm shakin' it, boss!
BelMarduk posts:
>I'm interested in words that have changed over the years to mean the opposite of the original meaning. A very common example is the word >bad<. Which can now mean really good.
>I've also found that the word >fussy< was used differently in the forties. When they said "I'm not fussy about oatmeal" (found in Who Has Seen the Wind - W.O. Mitchell) it meant the person did not like oatmeal. If I said the same thing today it would mean I don't mind oatmeal.
I have had a problem with misinterpreting this word. I have, on occasion, given my father (now 82) food which he said he was "not fussy about" thinking that he thought it was OK to eat but not his favourite when he really meant that he disliked it.
Another example is doubt. Nowadays if we say "I doubt it happened" we mean we think it didn't happen, but in the 19th century or earlier it seems to have meant something like "It may have happened but I don't know for sure".
Of course, I don't have any examples to hand
, but I will try and remember to post it if I see one.
Bingley
I'm digressing into phrases here, but did anyone see the Almodovar film 'Tie me up, tie me down'? Two phrases which seem as though they ought to have opposite meanings, but which actually mean the same thing. I can't remember what the original Spanish title was, but I'm sure the English one is totally untranslatable for non-English speakers.
On the subject of words such as 'wicked' and 'terrific', the meanings of these words haven't actually changed, they have just been adopted as slang and subverted, if you like. The definitions of slang words are notoriously fuzzy - look at 'cool' and 'hot' - the definitions of these two diametrically opposite words are so fuzzy that they overlap.
the meanings of these words haven't actually changedAh, now you 'beg the question'! In what resides the meaning - a dictionary, or received opinion changeable from time to time?
For my part, I would like to quote the bible:
`When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful
tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor
less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words mean
so many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master--
that's all.'
Through the Looking Glass
http://ftp://uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu/pub/etext/gutenberg/etext91/lglass18.txtPS Loved the Almodovar, averyl
and going back more directly to the thread:
`When you say "hill,"' the Queen interrupted, `_I_ could show
you hills, in comparison with which you'd call that a valley.'
`No, I shouldn't,' said Alice, surprised into contradicting her
at last: `a hill CAN'T be a valley, you know. That would be
nonsense--'
The Red Queen shook her head, `You may call it "nonsense" if
you like,' she said, `but I'VE heard nonsense, compared with
which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!'
Alice in Wonderland
http://www.bragi.com/
"I doubt it happened"
The Victorians seem to be ambivalent about the use of "I doubt it ... ." cf "I doubt it," said the Carpenter, and shed a bitter tear. which does mean (i think) that he did not believe there was any real possibility of the sand being swept away.
But Dickens abounds with the usage that you refer to, Bingley, as does Trollope.
I think that it was apparent to the contemporary speakers (and readers) by the context in which the phrase appeared
I think some abivalence also applies to the word 'could'. A common expression here is 'I could care less' it means your are really at the lowest point in caring, caring less would be a physical and emotional impossibility. But the the dictionary definition of 'could' is the opposite; a past tense or a less forceful form of the word 'can'. So can you or can you not care less. Go figure.
'I could care less'
I've always said "I couldn't care less". Not sure if I've ever heard 'I could care less' here.
Not sure if I've ever heard 'I could care less' here.Yep, I think this is definitely Advanced Pondspeak, probably of the LA variant
It surely goes (as a darkly ironic exclamation) with the teen language formations such as "Like, REALLY.." and similar.
But what are we to make of "Go figure"?
this is one that gets much play in U.S. discussion groups; here is what the alt.eng.usage FAQ has to say:
"could care less". The idiom "couldn't care less", meaning "doesn't care at all" (the meaning in full is "cares so little that he couldn't possibly care less"), originated in Britain around 1940. "Could care less", which is used with the same meaning, developed in the U.S. around 1960. We get disputes about whether the latter was originally a mis-hearing of the former; whether it was originally ironic; or whether it arose from uses where the negative element was separated from "could" ("None of these writers could care less . . .") Henry Churchyard believes that this sentence by Jane Austen may be pertinent: "You know nothing and you care less, as people say." (Mansfield Park (1815), Chapter 29) Meaning-saving elaborations have also been suggested; e.g., "As if I could care less!"; "I could care less, but I'd have to try"; "If I cared even one iota -- which I don't --, then I could care less."
as to "go figure", we really need a valley-speak expert; but I found the following at an American slang for Aussies web site (go figure):
go figure v. Go and think about the illogicality or contradictions in what I just said, because I cannot
understand it (e.g., ``The government said it would promote free trade by increasing tariffs on imported
goods. Go figure.'').
Yes, and it is usually said with a slight shrug of the shoulders and a bemused look on one's face.