Twice while watching the press conferences of senior U.S. officials concerning the anthrax scare, I heard the word weaponisation used. As in, the weaponisation of anthrax.

This sort of stupidisation and abusification of the English language really annoys me.

the weaponisation of anthrax. This sort of stupidisation and abusification of the English language really annoys me.
In the good old days, anthrax killed people without any help from terrorists, Rousepeteur. Now it is used as a weapon. If we don't describe this as "the weaponisation of anthrax", how will we describe it? Spores don't target people, Rouse, people do.

Plutarch has a point, in that when something never before thought of as a weapon, is made into one, a new word may be desirable to make this clear, though I doubt that it would be needed very often. Weaponization, while easy to understand, is clumsy enough that I too dislike it, but can't think of a better word.

a couple of points on this one...
1) it's not a new word (which doesn't excuse it), it's been around since 1969, when it was evidently coined by the US Dept. of Defense
2) since it's a US coinage, the proper spelling is weaponization
3) as bill points out, there don't seem to be any better words at this point in time

oops... I lied, that was three points. as long as I've overextended my stay, I might as well throw in this cross thread:
'weapon' is a an archaic verb which has been almost completely vanquished by 'arm'.

1969 U.S. Dept. Defense Appropriation Bill 1970 (91st Congress 1 Sess., House Rep. 698) 72 Aircraft Weaponization (advanced and exploratory development) was reduced. 1973 Black Panther 7 Apr. 10/2 Observers worry that the fledgling crime protection industry may follow a similar line, with huge profits made in this industry supporting a new domestic lobby for more weaponized solutions to the anger of the ghetto, the barrio and the poor white hollow. 1976 Aviation Week 1 Nov. 19/2 He said the Navy plans to build a 3,000-ton ‘weaponized’ surface-effect ship. 1982 N.Y. Times 23 Mar. a–14/2 Chemical warfare agents were+weaponized with Soviet assistance in Laos, Vietnam and Kampuchea. 1983 Aviation Week 17 Jan. 27/2 He cited an alarming trend toward the weaponization of space as the reason for his new emphasis on the civilian uses of space.

I will admit to some waffling on this issue. I'm not really sure the word is necessary, but on the other hand, one of the beauties of English is that if enough people think there should be a new word, there will be. Some will have a limited shelf life, for example splash-down, while others will persist.

How about "weapons-grade anthrax", Rouspeteur? A New York Times editorial on Friday criticized a statement made at a press briefing on Thursday about the anthrax that was sent to Senator Daschle. A spokesman for the Defence Department said "the Daschle material" was "run of the mill" anthrax. The NYT editor noted that the spokesperson was not able to comment "on whether it had an aerosol-like quality or was weapons-grade anthrax". Seems to me that anything that is used as a weapon, and performs like a weapon, is "weapons-grade anthrax" whether or not it is "run of the mill".

Seems to me that anything that is used as a weapon, and performs like a weapon, is "weapons-grade anthrax" whether or not it is "run of the mill".

In theory perhaps, but it is my understanding that in order to be an effective weapon, it does have to be refined to the point where the particles are small enough to affect the lungs. As an example, a lump of plutonium could be used a weapon since it is radioactive, but in order to use it in a nuclear weapon it must be refined considerably. It is weapons-grade once it is suitable for use in a nuclear device.

Met a Swede the other day who told me something interesting that fits with this theme.

Apparently it is illegal to bring new words into the Icelandic language - they are trying to maintain its purity. When something new appears on the world's horizon (like "the internet" for instance), the Icelanders invent a word with roots from their own language to describe it. Sounds too damn hard.

(Was interesting to meet this Swedish guy - I thought they all had blue and yellow faces - but he didn't....)

stales

>And I like "weapons-grade," too, as an adjective.

just so. you can't use it interchangeably with weaponization without doing some other major rewritization.

(would weaponizing be any less offensive than weaponization?)

Also, weapons-grade anthrax has been cultivated to be resistant to most antibiotics, or so ABC told me.

Ah yes, I'd heard that the Anthrax Biorefinement Cooperative had started up a lab in Gisborne ...

stupidisation and abusification of the English language

Not to mention bastardization.

The Poynter Institute, a Florida-based journalism school and media watchdog outfit, features an article by one of its resident experts on "weaponize":

http://63.208.24.134/Terrorism/Roy20.htm

It's a pretty good site for news/info links, too (Max, whaddya think?)

http://www.poynter.org/

I am just glad the author did not attempt to defend the truly execrable "ise" word that has stopped people from setting priorities

Heaven forfend that anyone should use four syllables when five would do just as easily.

Arright Max! Whur at's the dang biscuit! Don't make me slobber all over you.

I am just glad the author did not attempt to defend the truly execrable "ise" word that has stopped people from setting priorities.

I was surprised to note that the OED does have prioritize (US origin, first quoted usage 1973), but not priorize, which I have also heard used.

Found when looking up prioritize...

Posteriority
1. The state or quality of being later or subsequent in time. Opposed to priority.
1387–8 T. Usk Test. Love iii. iv. (Skeat) l. 166 All thinges, that been in diuers times, and in diuers places temporel, without posteriorite or priorite, been closed ther in perpetuall nowe. 1587 Golding De Mornay (1592) 131 By a certeine maner and kinde of posterioritie. 1683 Cave Ecclesiastici 319 The Preposition+implies+a Posteriority in point of time. 1726 Ayliffe Parergon 110 This Priority or Posteriority of Birth comes no less in enquiry to the Ordinary. 1885 Salmon Introd. N.T. xi. 242 To establish the posteriority of two of our Canonical Gospels.

†b. Law. See quot. 1607. Obs.
1523 Fitzherb. Surv. 23b, If the tenaunt holde of two lordes by knight seruyce, of one by priorite and of another by posteryorite and dye, the lorde that the tenaunt holdeth of by priorite shall haue the warde of the body, be it heyre male or heyre female. 1607 Cowell Interpr., Posteriority is a word of comparison and relation in tenure, the correlatiue whereof is prioritie. For a man holding lands or tenements of two lords, holdeth of his auncienter Lord by prioritie, and of his later Lord by posterioritie.

2. Inferiority in order, rank, or dignity. Now rare.
1534 in W. H. Turner Select. Rec. Oxford (1880) 123 That the+Chaunr and Schollers might be befor them+, and so to spite the said Mayr and Comminaltie from their prioritie to posterioritie. 1644 Maxwell Prerog. Chr. Kings xv. 146 How can a Society be imagined without order? and how order without priority and posteriority? 1678 Cudworth Intell. Syst. i. iv. §36. 598 There must of necessity be+a priority and posteriority+of dignity as well as Order amongst them. 1704 Norris Ideal World ii. xiii. 571, I mean that order of priority or posteriority, according to which this application is to be made.

†3. The back, the back parts of the body. Obs. rare—1.
c1532 G. Du Wes Introd. Fr. ii. CCiij, Moyses by the graunt of god dyd merite to se his posterioritie [F. merita de ueoir sa posteriorité: cf. Exod. xxxiii. 23 mea posteriora], the whiche is to vnderstande his workes.

I can now coin a new word: posterioritise. (I was informed that weaponization should have a "z" because it was coined in the U.S., however, no such limitation applies to my word.)

Saw a biochemist being quizzed on this subject on TV today. What constituted "weaponised" anthrax vs. normal anthrax came up in the interview. Thought you may be interested to hear the following...

Apparently anybody with a sample of the virus can grow anthrax and produce spores. Problem is, the spores produced in this manner clump together and are thus relatively heavy. They are no good for weapons because they lodge in the upper respiratory tract. (Sounds bad enough to me).

In order to get right into the lungs, the clumps of spores need to broken up by further processing. This is the "weaponisation" phase we've heard about.

So now you know. Blame the biochemists!

stales

I think you will find that anthrax germs are not all that uncommon in rural environments, maybe not in large concentrations but definitely there, sort of like tetanus. Luckily, it's not that easy for humans to contract the disease, though it can go through cattle and sheep pretty quickly.

They are pretty easy to identify under a microscope, so anyone who finds them in their cellular form wouldn't have any trouble growing them in test tubes. Anthrax, like many forms of bacteria, encapsulates itself in spores under adverse conditions as a method of self-preservation, and it's the spores that are being used to such great effect in the current crisis.

Spores are pretty imprevious to a lot of otherwise hostile conditions, but dry heat, bleach, and radiation all zap them thoroughly.

I can now coin a new word: posterioritise. (I was informed that weaponization should have a "z" because it was coined in the U.S., however, no such limitation applies to my word.)

I like your word and the concept, Rous.

And zertainly don't let your zpelling be influenzad by the United Ztates monopoly of zpell-checking!

I can now coin a new word: posterioritise

I'm sure the International Society of Procrastinators will send you a Certificate of Commendation as soon as they get around to it.

ISP: We're bullish on tomorrow

And zertainly don't let your zpelling be influenzad by the United Ztates monopoly of zpell-checking!

Personally, I use a spell-chequer.

let your zpelling be influenzad[zic] by the United Ztates monopoly

At least Us'nz know when a sibilant iz voised and when it's unvoised.

unvoised

yeahbut®

shouldn't that be voist, Mr Reforma?

anywaze, I woz hinting at the difference between inflection and infection...

allus did love One Flu Over The Cuckoo's Nezt