|October 29th, 2012||#1|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Blog Entries: 34
Reluctant vs Reticent
Maybe I'm missing a couple of layers of skin, and I'm sure someone can prove me wrong, since misuses are nearly always as old as correct uses, but the current vogue for using reticent to mean reluctant drives me nuts. All these horror/slasher movies have no motivation except the desire to kill young sluts; a much more plausible and useful basis for a story would be an enraged fired dictionary employee who goes around the nation murdering public speakers who mix up these two. The guy is tired of his dictionary AmeriKwan-Shareitage Dictionary simply adding misuses at the bottom of legitimate, traditional uses as a way to pander to dictionary buyers raised on an unhealthy diet of self-esteem. Ie, twerps who can't ever be wrong about anything, and certainly won't consume any product -- even a fucking dictionary -- that suggests they are.
So look at this definition of reticent. Notice that the third definition is reluctant. But this is NOT WHAT RETICENT MEANS. I am so goddamned pissed over this I can't see straight. Read the first two defintions. Then look up reluctant.
THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FUCKING DO WITH ONE ANOTHER.
THEY ARE TWO ENTIRELY SEPARATE AND UNRELATED CONCEPTS.
They have the same consonsants, so illiterate, unread idiot Kwans think they mean the same thing, and even half-literate people use reticent because they don't think but copy whatever they hear, wrong or right. Someone started mistakenly using reticent to mean reluctant -- a not at all uncommon word in the '70s that is today rarer than hen's teeth -- and it rapidly spread to the entire speaking public.
And then the word professionals at the dictionaries shabbily accede in this miserable diminution of our language.
Reluctant means one thing. Reticent means something entirely else.
Quit pandering, you professional dics! Stand up for what is right. Otherwise why do we need you? If every possible misuse is made legitimate, why do we need a dictionary in the first place?
Definition of RETICENT
: inclined to be silent or uncommunicative in speech : reserved [quiet, secretive, shy are closer than this shitty definition; their definition better fits taciturn; i have never before seen reticent as primarily relating to speech, it refers to secretiveness or shyness, the not-speaking being a manifestation of this deeper, permanent character quality]
: restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance <the room has an aspect of reticent dignity — A. N. Whitehead>
— ret·i·cent·ly adverb
Examples of RETICENT
<the panel decided to investigate the fraud charges against the company, which has always been reticent about its internal operations> [secretive works better than reticent]
<her husband is by nature a reticent person, and she resigned herself to that fact long ago>
… his friends and associates are conspicuously reticent to discuss him in public. —Martin Flanagan, Manchester Guardian Weekly, 29 Dec. 1991
Flanagan's is a MISUSE of language. The correct term is RELUCTANT or UNWILLING. It refers to disposition, not character trait. His coworkers are shy to discuss him? Are secretive to discuss him? Are tight-mouthed to discuss him? None of those makes sense. Rather his coworkers are UNWILLING or RELUCTANT to discuss him. They are NOT DISPOSED to talk about him. Definition of RELUCTANT
: feeling or showing aversion, hesitation, or unwillingness <reluctant to get involved>; also : having or assuming a specified role unwillingly <a reluctant hero>
Origin of RETICENT
Latin reticent-, reticens, present participle of reticēre to keep silent, from re- + tacēre to be silent — more at tacit
First Known Use: circa 1834
Related to RETICENT
Synonyms: close, closemouthed, dark, secretive, tight-mouthed, uncommunicative
Antonyms: communicative, open
Lost inability to make distinctions that need to be made, for political and general-life reasons, is characteristic of a failing society. Indeed, people are induced to undue simplification through the deliberate misuse and even more so the pruning or funneling of language, as Orwell made a career out of noticing. Object to anything on The Agenda? Why you're a hater, driven by hate. That makes perfect sense to the common man.
Last edited by Alex Linder; October 29th, 2012 at 10:01 PM.
|October 29th, 2012||#2|
Join Date: Jul 2011
I feel the same way with the following "popular usages." As George Carlin wrote before kicking off about 5 pages of these "popular usage" frauds... FUCK POPULAR USAGE AND FUCK YOUR MOTHER AND FUCK YOU...POPULARLY!
Penultimate/ultimate bugs me a lot.
Jumbling a bunch of prefixes and adjectives together until something gets a word salad yard long label barfed on it... "That album is a quasi-pseudo proto-experimentatal blackened-crust-thrash offering."
Which segues me cheaply into my next offering...EVERYTHING IS AN OFFERING.
I refrain from political sloganeering and cheap verbal tricks. This would be a 12 page post.
Other recent, within the past 5 years abominations and advertising slogan horseshit for food...
And the Big Kahuna, The King Fraud...
ORGANIC. I got an organ for ya. Right here. In my boxers.
Every single piss water beer that I drink to get drunk is "smooth." In some cases "exceptionally smooth." Steel Reserve High Gravity is "exceptionally smooth" in comparison to your tongue getting hitched to an F-150 and dragged on a Texas backroad. The other one these scumfucks love for beer is "refreshing."
|October 29th, 2012||#3|
Join Date: Jun 2009
14 March, 2006 (VNN Front Page)
‘Reticent’ vs. ‘Reluctant’
Posted by alex in Alex Linder, language at 7:59 am | Permanent Link
One of the pleasures of the Internet is the chance to horsewhip dumb twats like Debbie Schlussel. An even greater pleasure is to lecture morons on proper English. It’s the intellectual equivalent of jerking off, since a world that ill notes the diff twixt possess’ and plural is hardly capable of anything finer. But let’s jerk away anyhow. My bugaboo is the difference between ‘reticence’ and ‘reluctance.’ ‘Reticence’ is the dolt flavor-o’-the-fiveyear. It used to be ‘facetious,’ still heard now and then, but faded. Here’s the New York Times perpetrating the error. But reticence by some big media companies is making room for independent programmers to explore all sorts of niches. The proper word is ‘reluctance’ or lack of interest or reservations or refusal, not ‘reticence.’ Reticence refers not to a transitory disposition but a trait. If I don’t want to do something, you can’t express that by saying I’m shy or secretive. Read the definitions here and here.
Now, you’ll see that the second definition of ‘reticence’ is the first definition of ‘reluctance’ – unwillingness. “Aha!” you say, “you’re an idiot.” Perhaps you’re right, but you can’t prove it by this example, for I strongly suspect, without being absolutely sure, that ‘reticent’ only recently acquired its second meaning, through the iron law of misuse, i.e., “there is no law save usage,” in precisely the same way that ‘enormity‘ now means huge, instead of outrageous crime. Using terms interchangeably or indiscriminately is unAryan. Don’t do it.
|October 29th, 2012||#4|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Blog Entries: 34
Last edited by Alex Linder; October 31st, 2012 at 08:22 PM.
|October 30th, 2012||#5|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: under your bed
"Don't underestimate the power of 'evil.' ... The fact is, 'evil' makes women horny and men curious. Use those to further the cause."
|October 30th, 2012||#6|
Join Date: Jun 2012
On the OP: it's good to see that someone still has some standards. This may seem like quibbling to most, but if you can't discriminate (a good word that has gotten a bad reputation for no good reason!) in small matters, how can you discriminate about important matters?
After a friend suggested it, we have the outlet hose on our washing machine running outside to a couple of our orange trees, and those oranges are the BEST oranges I literally have ever tasted.
Citrus trees apparently love phosphates- who knew? Artificial fertiliser = not organic.
In some cases, yeah, organic is better, but not always. And organic mass agriculture is not at all possible - it only works on a much smaller scale.