History HubÌý permalink
It is all in a word.
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Sunday, 23rd October 2011
Further to two threads, where there has been some discussion on the interpretations of a word differing between the past and present, which for those new to history can lead to misunderstandings of historical events or practices.
As already discussed, to describe someone as black today would automatically be an indication of a person's skin colour whereas in the past it was usually used for a person with black hair. Likewise, (much to Richard I's dismay I'm sure) mention of the sharing of a bed would have sexual connotations today, yet bed sharing was once a common practice and mention of the act would not have implied an intimite relationship.
Is there any other examples of how the use of a word has changed over time, and because of that change, our interpretation of history? -
Message 2
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 24th October 2011
King Ethelred would be clambering to give you a good example were he still around to hear your enquiry.
But there are other very common examples of words which have profound implications with regard to an accurate historical understanding of people and events to which they apply. We tend, for example, to assume a meaning for the word "emperor" which, had we suggested the same to its first Roman incumbent, Augustus, might well have got us executed as it is almost diametrically opposed to the meaning he himself wished to convey when adopting it.
Our modern use of the word "vandal" makes it very unlikely that the people after whom it is named will ever get anything less than a jaundiced evaluation historically - though this is precisely what the catholic propagandists desired, of course, when they ensured that the synonym they themselves invented would prevail. The real Vandals' only real crime was that they were the "wrong type" of christian, but that was enough to condemn even their race's name to a wilful opprobrium which lasts to this day.
Words imported from other languages in the form of personal names are also potential semantic minefields. When Ramanath Tagore upon his elevation to Raja ny Northbrook in 1874 declared Britain to be a "formidable nation of Gandhis" he could hardly have foreseen that from 70 years later onwards, and thanks to a famous bearer of the name in the meantime, this would be quoted as rather odd affirmation that 19th century Indians regarded Brits as "peace-loving people". All he had meant to say of course was that the Brits were pretty good fighters for the grocers that they really were. -
Message 3
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Tuesday, 25th October 2011
Thanks Nordmann. I suppose barbarian could be another example, originally meant to apply to anyone who wasn't Greek or a foreigner but has evolved to mean a whole lot more.
-
Message 4
Posted by WarsawPact (U1831709) on Tuesday, 25th October 2011
What about the Goths - a pallid-faced, black-clad introspective people who fought the later Roman Empire, pushed back the Huns (presumably utilising their knowledge of the occult) and were responsible for gloomy, soaring architecture, literature and music.
'Fellow' seems to have changed in meaning over time - its definition as an untrustworthy, lower class type being at odds with its use as a title for members of various institutes and societies (Fellow of the Royal Institute of... ).
The change in meaning for 'gay', 'mistress', 'madam' is evident. -
Message 5
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Wednesday, 26th October 2011
And who decided that the Philistines were just a bunch of Philistines? There must have been *some* quite arty and cultured Philistines.
Naughty is an interesting word. These days it suggests childish disobedience or mischief, or something that is *mildly* indecent or titillating. Nothing really serious. During the 16th century, however, naughty was an all-purpose word which meant bad (corrupt, morally bad), vicious (of an animal), poor (of weather), unhealthy, unpleasant, inferior (of quality), or foul (of water).
Shakespeare uses naughty quite a lot - you have "a naughty knave" (in "Julius Caesar"), a "naughty night to swim in" (stormy weather in "Lear") and "So shines a good deed in a naughty world" ("Merchant of Venice").
My favourite use of the word though is from the King James Bible. In Jeremiah 24:2 you read of two baskets of figs: "One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad."
Nothing worse than a naughty fig.
In Proverbs too there's a reference to "A naughty person, a wicked man" who "walketh with a froward mouth."
When Francis I was told of the fall of Katherine Howard, Sir William Paget reported that the French king observed, "She has done wondrous naughty". They used that actual historically correct line in "The Tudors" recently, but it didn't work at all - made what was actually a severe condemnation of the queen's conduct sound like a line from a Benny Hill show. -
Message 6
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Wednesday, 26th October 2011
I think the Philistines just suffered from a bad press agent !
They were almost certainly a lot more cultured and civilized than the Israelites, but they did not write the book, so they lost out. It is the old, old, story - it does not matter how big a crash your tree makes when it falls, if there is nobody there to hear it, it is soon forgotten.
If only they had talked to Max Clifford . . . -
Message 7
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 26th October 2011
The Philistines may have been portrayed negatively by the biblical Jews but they are really only mentioned as one of several enemies of Israel in the bible though with no specifically common personal characteristics ascribed to them (Samaritans receive a much harsher personal assessment from the same authors, for example). Its use as an uncultured person seems to have originated in Jena in the 17th century following a sermon at the university there which prompted the word to enter student slang, originally as an uneducated person and then in its broader sense.
-
Message 8
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
"Silly" as in "Silly Sussex" - meant holy AIUI.
"Silly" as in the "sily widwe" of Chaucer's "Nonne Preestes Tale" meant simple, in the uncomplicated sense. -
Message 9
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
I think that someone who was 'enthusiastic' once approximated to a religious fanatic and to do something indifferently meant impartially.
There are regional differences as well. As a medical student in Norwich many years ago I was shocked to learn that someone who was 'very moderate' was actually at death's door.
The euphemism 'making love' is very recent. It is a commonplace in minor early 20th century novels to read something like: "mother looked out of the window to see the vicar making love to her daughter in the garden".
TP -
Message 10
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
The ordinary words mentioned especially by Temperance seem to me more likely to confuse than words that have come from specific people or peoples like Vandal and Ethelred and Philistine. "Making love" in these older books does always bring you up with a slight shock. But even that most of us realise from context if not knowledge. But when I read excellent books like Juliet Barker's Agincourt or Jenny Potter's The Rose they have explanations of words or ideas that had quite a different meaning from what is traditionally assumed, and they are not generally known in that way. Partly why I prefer to read secondary sources - primary ones will have language that may well mean something quite different from what I assume. (Of course the interpretations given may be subject to argument too.)
"Moderate" always seems a suspicious word to me in medical reports, TP. "Mild" seems to include a couple of broken limbs and much bruising, so goodness knows what "moderate" might include. When I was a child my reports had me (offensively to my eyes) called 'very fair' in some subjects - probably phys ed (though surely that should have been 'abysmal') or 'initiative and self-reliance', which I never understood the meaning of exactly. I took 'fair' to be bad and therefore 'very fair' to be very bad, and it was quite late in the piece before I realised my mistake - too late for it to change in my brain.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 11
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
When Francis I was told of the fall of Katherine Howard, Sir William Paget reported that the French king observed, "She has done wondrous naughty".Ìý
That sounds most unlikely - whatever he said he would have said in French wouldn't he? -
Message 12
Posted by Meles meles (U14993979) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
Careful UR:
As a word "silly" as in silly Sussex never meant holy. The OE word was saelig or salig - meaning blesssed/holy .... (the same word still exists I think in Flemish and Germam). Sussex was saelig... not silly. Just because the original word, saelig, has been corrupted t hrough the centuries to "silly" is not the same as saying that silly ever meant holy. -
Message 13
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Saturday, 29th October 2011
Careful UR:
As a word "silly" as in silly Sussex never meant holy. The OE word was saelig or salig - meaning blesssed/holy .... (the same word still exists I think in Flemish and Germam). Sussex was saelig... not silly. Just because the original word, saelig, has been corrupted t hrough the centuries to "silly" is not the same as saying that silly ever meant holy. Ìý Thanks - I'm glad you were able to sett me straight.
How about this trio?
-
Message 14
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Thankyou to everyone for your interesting replies!
The word silly meant blessed or happy in the 11th century going through pious, innocent, harmless, pitiable, feeble, feeble minded before finally ending up as foolish or stupid.
Pretty began as crafty then changed via clever, skilfully made, fine to beautiful.
Buxom began with the meaning obedient and changed via compliant, lively, plump to large breasted.
The word nice meant stupid and foolish in the late 13th Century. It went through a number of changes including wanton, extravagant, elegant, strange, modest, thin, and shy. By the middle of the 18th Century it had gained its current meaning of pleasant and agreeable.
Some other words found that have changed meaning. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find an explanation on how the change occured.
Word Original Meaning
brave cowardice (as in bravado)
counterfeit legitimate copy
cute bow-legged
girl young person of either sex
guess take aim
knight boy
luxury sinful self indulgence
neck parcel of land (as in neck of the woods)
notorious famous
nuisance injury, harm
quick alive (as in quicksilver)
sophisticated corrupted
tell to count (as in bank teller)
truant beggar -
Message 15
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Ooops, sorry about the bottom list. That is not how I typed it and I can't understand where all the spaces went. Still floating in space maybe?
-
Message 16
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
The word nice meant stupid and foolish in the late 13th Century. It went through a number of changes including wanton, extravagant, elegant, strange, modest, thin, and shy. By the middle of the 18th Century it had gained its current meaning of pleasant and agreeable.Ìý
The word 'nice' has gone through at least 4 metamorphoses over the centuries. Originally it meant 'unknowledgeable' (from the Latin 'nescius') i.e. 'unaware' or 'ignorant'. (The word ignorant itself, of course, has changed its meaning.) For some time it meant unknowledgeable as in ‘foolish’, ‘wanton’ or even ‘lascivious’. (The phrase 'a nice girl' would mean completely different things to Chaucer and Dickens.)
There was then something of a volte-face in the 15th Century when it changed interpretation of being 'unknowledgeable’ in the sense of being ‘innocent’ or ‘timid’. (It’s believed that the dialect word ‘nesh’ may be a survivor of this interpretation.)
From meaning ‘timid’ it made a further step to mean ‘overly careful’(the term ‘nice and early’ could derive from this) and then it made a further step again to mean ‘fastidious’, ‘fussy’ or ‘perfectionist’. (This perfectionist sense still survives today among joiners and carpenters for whom ‘a nice join’ between 2 pieces of wood is one which is so fine as to be almost imperceptible.)
In the 18th Century it fell victim to overuse so that by the time Jane Austen was writing Northanger Abbey at the turn of the 19th century she was able to pen the famous dialogue between Catherine Morland, Henry Tilney and Henry’s sister Eleanor:
Catherine Morland: “But now really, do not you think ‘Udolpho’ the nicest book in the world?"
Henry Tilney: "The ‘nicest’ - by which I suppose you mean the neatest. That must depend upon the binding."
Eleanor Tilney: "Henry, you are very impertinent. Miss Morland, he is treating you exactly as he does his sister. He is forever finding fault with me, for some incorrectness of language, and now he is taking the same liberty with you. The word 'nicest,' as you used it, did not suit him; and you had better change it as soon as you can, or we shall be overpowered with Johnson and Blair all the rest of the way."
Catherine Morland: "I am sure I did not mean to say anything wrong; but it is a nice book, and why should I not call it so?"
Henry Tilney: "Very true and this is a very nice day, and we are taking a very nice walk; and you are two very nice young ladies. Oh! It is a very nice word indeed! It does for everything. Originally perhaps it was applied only to express neatness, propriety, delicacy, or refinement - people were nice in their dress, in their sentiments, or their choice. But now every commendation on every subject is comprised in that one word."
It's now been stuck with that current bland usage for over 200 years now. -
Message 17
Posted by Mikestone8 (U13249270) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Many such changes are class-related, Thus being a "villlain", "vulgar" or "churlish" implies behaving like one of the lower classes. Being "boorish" means acting like a peasant. "Rude" implies coarse and unrefined, ie not a gentleman.
"Pagan" reflects the fact that Christianity was initially an urban faith. It just means "peasant" -
Message 18
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
There are also two famous (or infamous) swear words (that can't be mentioned here) that were once acceptable to use for certain actions and certain body parts. Although perhaps they haven't undergone a change in meaning so much as a change in our idea of what is appropriate.
-
Message 19
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Hasn't there benn something similar in French? All the words used to refer to a girl gradually come to mean a harlot?
-
Message 20
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Buxom began with the meaning obedient and changed via compliant, lively, plump to large breasted. Ìý
Yes, and to modern ears the old wedding vow "to be bonny and buxom in bed and at board" makes even the demurest of brides sound like barmaid! In actual fact a girl was simply promising to be good (bona?) and obedient to her husband. It's what eventually became our "to love, honour and obey".
There's a 16th century reference to being "bonnaire and buxome" to the Pope!
That sounds most unlikely - whatever he said he would have said in French, wouldn't he? Ìý
I hope you're not disputing the authority of Alison Weir, Peggy?
Francis actually used the word naughty again in a letter he wrote to Henry just after Sir William Paget had informed him of the English queen's misconduct:
"I am sorry to hear of the displeasure and trouble which has been caused by the lewd and naughty behaviour of the Queen."
Until today I had always assumed that "lewd" used here meant obscene, promiscuous or disgusting. But no. In 1542 lewd apparently simply meant evil or wicked - no sexual connotations at all. Real surprise that one.
The other thing I've just found out is the identity of "Blair" in the "Northanger Abbey" quotation. I've always assumed he was a dictionary man, but no - Hugh Blair published a book in 1783 called "Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres." Blair along with a two others - Murray and Lowth - were *the* experts on English grammar at the time. They sound a very alarming trio.
" -
Message 21
Posted by Daniel-K (U2684833) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
"Pagan" reflects the fact that Christianity was initially an urban faith. It just means "peasant"Ìý
An oft-repeated claim but a disputed one. The Latin term 'pagani' could mean either a rustic or a civilian. That the Christian use of the term derives from the first of those meanings is unlikely as the word first occurs in the Christian sources at a time when Christianity was as much a minority in the city as the country. That it derives from the second meaning ("a civilan") is more likely with early Christians seeing themselves as soldiers of Christ against the devil while non-Christians were the civilians not involved in the conflict. Only later, when Christianity had achieved a position of power, did Christians start to equate the civilians with the devil and the pagan bystanders become the pagan enemy. -
Message 22
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Ah, that information about 'bonnie' explains a good deal. I'd always wondered if the Scottish nobility were particularly well favoured in their physiognomy, what with Bonnie Dundee, the Bonnie Earl of Murray, Bonnie P C etc but unless the word is derived from 'bona' in the Julian and Sandy sense, the appellation 'good' that makes more sense. I'm not sure, though, exactly what personal characteristic Burns was referring to in Bonnie Mary of Argyll!
-
Message 23
Posted by Meles meles (U14993979) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Actualy Ur, I think other postings have set ME straight.
Having been brought up in Sussex, at school we were always taught that Sussex was silly because the pre-conquest county was known as being "saelig" meaning blessed as a consequence of its numerous churches and monasteries - (in much the same way that king Ethelred is known as unready)... but that such words get corrupted with time. But, I can now see that the story is more complex and that blessed, ie saelig, ie silly can well mean innocent , as in:
"blessed are the innocent..."
PS. I loved the Wren/St Paul's quote... that would have been excellent as a Friday quiz question. -
Message 24
Posted by glen berro (U8860283) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
Words imported from other languages in the form of personal names are also potential semantic minefields.Ìý
I suppose you would include Tory and Hooligan among those, Nordmann?
I haven't had a look at the origins of these as an insult as far as English were concerned, but would be interested as to when Tory became a badge of pride to some.
glen -
Message 25
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 30th October 2011
"Tory" was only briefly a term intended to insult, specifically to insult the supporters of the Duke of York's right to succession in the early 1680s, and applied by the "exclusioners" who were then a largely anonymous group and who proselytised through papmhlets - hence the tendency to sloganise. Equating them with Irish Catholic dispossessed bandits carried a particular satirical relevance which was readily understandable in London.
Once the dust had settled after the not-so "glorious revolution" however the surviving members (politically) of the "tory" element regrouped and, with a considerably wry humour, were quite happy to adopt the term as their preferred title, even when that regrouping led to them founding an organised political party (a commandeering of an insult and its reapplication as a badge of identity such as blacks and homosexuals have executed in more recent times).
Those who organised in opposition, notably during Anne's reign, therefore employed the same humour and, in direct retaliation, adopted the name "Whiggamores" from another unlawful and rebellious group, this time from Scotland but with Presbyterian, anti-Catholic succession tendencies. Unlike "Tory", therefore, "Whig" was what you might call a self-inflicted derogatory term from the outset. -
Message 26
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 31st October 2011
Is there any other examples of how the use of a word has changed over time, and because of that change, our interpretation of history?
Ìý
Getting almost back to the original question;
The people of Turkey have the Irish to thank for their often cited propensity to indulge in hard labour with gusto, verve and sedulousness, a reputation which seems often completely at odds with the evidence presented to the onlooker in a warm land where flamboyant expenditure of energy is understandably rare generally, and restricted to an as-needs basis on the part of individuals (even more rare).
The long-established Gaelic euphemism for a strong, temperamental and indefatigable male - "torc" (a wild pig or boar) - when transplanted to the new world along with around a million Irish for whom heavy manual work was the only employment option, graduated in meaning to become a brawny labourer who was a cut above the average in terms of desperation to avoid being fired and willingness to (often literally) work to the point of complete exhaustion. The term "work like a Turk" - used originally by the Irish of themselves (a kind of basic career advice given to budding apprentices) was the result. -
Message 27
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 31st October 2011
Incidentally - how many Americans have a warped view of their land's true origins as an area of European settlement due to a mistaken belief that the land mass was called after an Italian, and not after the Welshman who financed Cabot's expeditions?
-
Message 28
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Saturday, 5th November 2011
As a teenager I was very puzzled as to how you could kill yourself with a sewing implement.
In the famous "To be or not to be" speech Hamlet considers the use of "a bare bodkin" as a quick and easy way to commit suicide.
A bodkin is a very large needle used for leather work, but in the 16th century it was also a small dagger.
Beaumont and Fletcher use the word in "Custom of the Country" - "Out with your bodkin, your pocket-dagger, your stiletto!"
And they meant daggers, not shoes!
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.