I noticed in a Guardian article recently the spelling defence, which I have come to expect from a Brit publication, but also the spelling defensive rather than defencive. Is this a tacit admission that the spelling defence is wrong?
Is this a tacit admission that the spelling of "defence" is wrong?
I don't think so.
But it could be a tacit admission that spelling is ruled by exceptions.
Dear Faldage: the question of "defence" vs. "defense"
has me sitting on the fense.
I thought that here on the Right Bank, we tend to use the (c)s for noun forms but (s)s for verb or other forms. In what context was the word defence used?
cheer
the sunshine warrior
Yep, the Lunnoner has it pretty much right, I reckon. You put up a spirited defence, but when they accuse you of being a bad winner you get all defensive. "c" in the noun, "s" in the verb.
The change in spelling in the US is clearly a result of extensive and successful lobbying by the AULTWU.
defencive vs. defensiveI am no grammarian, so I cannot couch my point, as others could, in technical terms.
But it seems to me that the "c" in "defensive" produces a different sound than the "s" in "defensive", whereas the "c" in "defence" and the "s" in "defense" sound the same.
Since the words "defence" and "defensive" pre-existed the Thirteen Colonies, Americans-in-waiting quite admirably retained the same pronunciation but regularized (and simplified) the spelling.
Personally, I think this was done not so much in a spirit of rebellion, as in a spirit of pragmatism and efficiency characteristic of the exigencies of the New World.
This spirit initiated a legion of changes such as the dropping of the redundant "u" in such words as neighbor, behavior, savior and arbor.
When America broke away from the Crown, it also broke away from hide-bound traditions which confused schoolchildren and the unschooled unnecessarily.
There was no aristocracy in America at the time, at least no native-born aristocracy, so everyone had real work to do and silly rules of spelling were wholly dispensable and something of a pomposity.
Back home in King George's England, the upper classes had no reason to make it easy for the lower classes to look as literate and polished as themselves.
At least, that's my theory.
At least, that's my theory.
Noah Webster would probably agree with you.
But it seems to me that the "c" in "defensive" produces a different sound than the "s" in "defensive", whereas the "c" in "defence" and the "s" in "defense" sound the same.
This does not make any sense. Both defense and defence are pronounced with the same voiceless alveolar fricative /s/. We can't really argue about the non-word defencive, but if it were a word, I can't see that it'd be pronounced any different than defensive. Just like the 'c' in civet.
Defense isn't a verb either, but defend is. Defence is a noun and defensive is an adjective.
Tell that to AULTWU! [or whoever they are]
Since I am a citizen of a country which retains the British monarch as a figurehead, I am entitled to express my opinion freely without fear of giving offence, or offense, to anyone.
Your post got between me and my target, Grapho. Nothing to do with yours!
Yes, I know defensive an adjective. But I was thinking about verbs around defend when I was typing, and a kinraidism slipped in.
Faldage has precious few original thoughts, so all he can usually do to keep up his end of the conversation is to snipe from the sidelines
. So, being a basically nice guy, I let him. It's "be kind to bored USns with not enough to do at work" week.
sniping from the sidelines
Faldage has been very sivil to me lately, so I think he is entitled to a spirited defence.
Who's sniping at whom from the sidelines?
sniping from the sidelines
Silly me, I thought we were discussing words, not personality traits.
Anyway, the English verb defend comes from the Latin verb defendo, -ere, defendi, defensum 'to repell, guard, defend'. There's also a verb defenso 'to defend, protect' that is obviously derived from the past particple of defendo. Our noun, defence (alternate spelling defense) also comes from that past particple. I don't see that it's useful arguing about English spelling, but to each his own.
Oh, I think that Faldo is quite capable of riposting on his own behalf!
I think that Faldo is quite capable of riposting on his own behalf!I'm sure. I just didn't want him riposting at me.
Re:
I don't see that it's useful arguing about English spelling, but to each his own.I am not interested in "arguing" about English spelling either.
My subject was the historical context in which variations in English spellings arose, and whether or not that context might elucidate the variations.
I don't think that is "arguing about English spelling".
I don't think I'm even "arguing" about history, or, for that matter, about anything at all.
I am simply positing a possible explanation for certain variations in spelling.
If you disagree with me disputatiously, then we might be "arguing" about historical influences, I suppose, but, in any event, we would not be "arguing about English spelling".
We both agree on how the variations of English spelling we are spelling are spelled. That means we are agreeing, not "arguing", or even disagreeing, about English spelling.
So there!
[It's been a slow afternoon for me as well.]
Please note that I said 'verb or other' forms.
Now I'll keep schtum.
the sunshine "let the blow fall soon or late, let what will be over me" warrior
Now I'll keep schtum.
Yiddish/English shtum is a great word. Related to German stumm and probably to our stumble.
Geez! A guy can't even poke the mickey anymore without everbody gettin all up in arms.
you leave mickey out of this!
-joe
I feel the need to point out that Pfranz Capfka and Faldage of Fong are thick as thieves. Y'all know how guys are. Mickeys notwithstanding, they show affection by poking fun at each other; I think that phenomenon is under Rule #9 1/2 in the Male Bonding Manual.
... the case that yez lot in the States poke the mickey? No doubt that's why our British sense of humour is so alien to you - after all, we take the mickey around here.
:-P
yez lot in the States poke the mickey?
Naw. USns slips people mickeys.
And both the Mickeys (Finn and Bliss) in question derive from the slang term for a Hibernian, yes?
Oh, I think that Faldo is quite capable of riposting on his own behalf! Reposting mends fences...
And repotting grows larger ferns.
and with ferns like that, who needs animals?
Reposting mends fences...Riposters do not mend fences, Jackie.
Riposters fence off. Sometimes they fence around. But, either way, they never get around to doing much of anything, least of all mending fences.
If you fence a riposter in, he will just start riposting in circles.
In time, he will dig himself into a hole too deep to crawl out of.
That's the last we'll see of that riposter.
Needless to say, no-one has ever played "last post" for a riposter who has played himself out.
I think that phenomenon is under Rule #9 1/2 in the Male Bonding Manual.
Yep, and we leave for our boys' club from Platform 9 3/4 ...
If you fence a riposter in, he will just start riposting in circles.
And if you repost a fencer in, he'll be foiled again.
And both the Mickeys (Finn and Bliss) in question derive from the slang term for a Hibernian, yes?
You called?
Cecil Adams has one version of the "Straight Dope" on this:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_092.html
[quote]
Most word books say the origin of "Mickey Finn" is obscure. But Cecil has come across one colorful if not necessarily reliable explanation in Gem of the Prairie, a 1940 history of the Chicago underworld by Herbert Asbury. Asbury claims the original Mickey Finn was a notorious Chicago tavern proprietor in the city's South Loop, then as now a nest of hardened desperadoes. In 1896 Finn opened a dive named the Lone Star Saloon and Palm Garden, where he fenced stolen goods, supervised pickpockets and B-girls, and engaged in other equally sleazy enterprises.
Around 1898 Finn obtained a supply of "white stuff" that may have been chloral hydrate. He made this the basis of two knockout drinks, the "Mickey Finn Special," consisting of raw alcohol, water in which snuff had been soaked, and a dollop of white stuff; and "Number Two," beer mixed with a jolt of white plus the aforementioned snuff water.[quote]
So, not necessarily a generic Irishman, but possibly a particular one.
hibernicus, your Mick-in-residence.
Good to see you resuming your residency here, hibernicus!
resuming your residency
Have you been hibernicating?
I wish! Sadly my employers have the idea that I should be forced to work for a living, and take pleasure in sending me to various distant locations with no access to the internet. But given half a chance, I'll be here, reading and posting, whether or not I have anything worth saying!
About defence/defense, we also have "licence/license" and "practise/practice".
Ah well, I suspect the unspoken concensus here was that one fight at a time was good fishing. Or some other partial and mixed metaphor.
Now I
am confused.
Are you saying that there is a verb
defense? Or is
defend pronounced
defense? And does British English distinguish between
license as a verb and
licence as a noun in its orthography? Or what?
In real English (you know we Brits are never going to stop thinking that!) we definitely say that "I have a licence, but I cannot license you to drive", for instance.
Defence is a noun. Defensive is not - and that's why it takes the (s).
cheer
the sunshine warrior
And if you repost a fencer in, he'll be foiled again
A riposter needs a good foil to sharpen his blade.
Force as a noun and a verb.
Impulse as a noun?
Fence as a noun and a verb?
Hence and whence as adverbs?
Sense?
Tense?
...
You want consistency? Try Esperanto ...
I expect nothing of the sort in English or any other language. (There are inconsistencies in Esperanto.) But when somebody quotes me a rule, I expect consistency or a caveat. I was lead to believe that British (aka "real") English had a rule, but it doesn't.
Well, yes it does. It goes "When the noun form of a word is spelled with a 'C' and the verb form of the same word is spelled with an 'S', learn to live with it. If this anomaly doesn't exist for any given noun and verb combination, learn to live with that, too."
As rules go, it's pretty straightforward and all-encompassing, I would have thought!
I was lead to believe that British (aka "real") English had a rule, but it doesn't
The "real" rule is much the same as the Golden Rule which prescribes that he who has the gold rules.
He who claims the "real" English rules the rules.
Ah, yes, I seem to remember
The Ruling Class.
I'd find it difficult to believe, though, that the British spelling would be incence (frankly).
Edit:
Perhaps that's incencitive of me,but then again I am easily incentivised (crossing threads somewhat adroitlessly.)
Ah TEd, you give a whole new implied meaning to the word "gauche"!
Good to see yer, too!
a whole new meaning to the word "gauche"
"Gauche" is an interesting word, Capfka.
If "adroitless" is the art of making the easy look difficult, "gauche" is the art of making the easy look disgusting.
"Gauche" is to "bad taste" what "sprezzatura" is to "meticulous". It gives "bad taste" a certain je ne sais quoi.
"Gauche" is becoming fashionable again, judging from the popularity of movies like "Dumb and Dumber".
Cap, you're so sinister...
If "adroitless" is the art of making the easy look difficult...
Was this ever established?
Re: "adroitless". Was this ever established?Well, it was Faldo's faux pas which inspired it. And that's establishment enuf for me.
P.S. There ain't no appeal from the establishment ... at least, around here.
In fact, you have to have Carpal Tunnel vision to even get a vote. [Just kidding, of course. I don't want to waste another good pseudonym.
]