tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post8468290343885419908..comments2024-03-14T10:31:26.918+00:00Comments on DCblog: On being orient(at)edDChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10192779827863835310noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-788950523009770602010-04-26T22:21:20.965+00:002010-04-26T22:21:20.965+00:00Both these verbs arrived relatively recently. Pres...Both these verbs arrived relatively recently. <i>Pressure</i> as a verb has a first recorded usage in 1930; <i>pressurise</i> in the technical sense in 1940. Evidently people wanted a technical term to distinguish it from the general one. But within five years the technical term had developed a more general sense, and both are now used, with <i>pressured</i> slightly more common (2:3) than <i>pressurised</i> in the British National Corpus. It's unusual to find two verbs so close in meaning, so I'd expect one or other to predominate in due course. But it hasn't happened yet.DChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192779827863835310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-58856786117968432642010-04-26T12:55:37.312+00:002010-04-26T12:55:37.312+00:00Thanks Professor for finally clearing this up. Cou...Thanks Professor for finally clearing this up. Could I ask if you've answered the query about being "pressurised" to do something. I thought that this referred to something being under high pressure, like a tyre being inflated, rather than someone being "pressured" into doing something unwillingly.<br />I'd be very grateful for any comment on this as my Mother says it all the time. Thank you.Tracyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05181142778525875668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-18459241692433521552010-04-23T13:08:55.651+00:002010-04-23T13:08:55.651+00:00Preventive/preventative is a similar pair, I think...Preventive/preventative is a similar pair, I think.Cecilynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-83010395290857508132010-04-19T13:28:02.891+00:002010-04-19T13:28:02.891+00:00My classmates made a joke about how oriental peopl...My classmates made a joke about how oriental people can get "disorientated" after seeing this essay I forward over to the class. As I went to research on it, I found out this interesting thing if you are not already aware:<br /><br />Orietal and orient come from same Latin root word Orientalis, which in Latin meant to face the east, and to take your bearings. This takes into consideration that the early people's centre mark was usually the sun, so the take your bearings would be to orientate to the east, or refering to Asian countries.<br /> <br />"orient" c.1727, originally "to arrange facing east," from Fr. s'orienter "to take one's bearings," lit. "to face the east" (also the source of Ger. orientierung), from O.Fr. orient "east," from L. orientum (see Orient (n.)). Meaning "determine bearings" first attested 1842; figurative sense is from 1850. <br /> <br />"oriental" late 14c., from O.Fr. oriental (12c.), from L. orientalis "of the east," from orientem (see Orient (n.)). Originally in reference to the sky, geographical sense is attested from late 15c.; oriental carpet first recorded 1868 (in C.L. Eastlake). The noun meaning "native or inhabitant of the east" is from 1701. <br /><br />Interesting to point out :-)憲次noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-21771922179301271392010-04-18T19:45:43.426+00:002010-04-18T19:45:43.426+00:00This is the reverse of "oblige" vs "...This is the reverse of "oblige" vs "obligate", where British English only uses the former, while American English uses the latter back-formation for "compel" and the former for "do a favour (for)".mollymoolynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-21448492679779990932010-04-18T18:45:04.531+00:002010-04-18T18:45:04.531+00:00Oh, sorry, yes... the 65 vs 4 million was actually...Oh, sorry, yes... the 65 vs 4 million was actually for the forms <i>oriented</i> vs <i>disoriented</i>.DChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192779827863835310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-23430775574053055072010-04-18T18:38:18.762+00:002010-04-18T18:38:18.762+00:00Two short notes:
Google: one would have to compar...Two short notes:<br /><br />Google: one would have to compare the verb in an unabmbiguous phrase; "orient" without any qualification will mostly be the noun.<br /><br />Back-formation from <i>orientation</i>: this might not be how the first instance of the verb was formed, but I'm quite sure it can play a role for people's preferences.Phillip Mindenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16801818752833289089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-63159406037783661382010-04-18T18:15:33.344+00:002010-04-18T18:15:33.344+00:00Eric Partridge wrote that orientate was correct as...Eric Partridge wrote that <i>orientate</i> was correct as an intransitive ("to face in some specific direction, originally and especially to the east"), and that <i>orient</i> was "preferable in all other senses". But this seems to have been his personal preference more than anything else.<br /><br />Gowers's prediction is something I noted in my own post about these words. The same author, in <i>The Complete Plain Words</i>, remarked that the figurative use of both terms was "passing all reasonable bounds". Unless I'm suffering a recency illusion, their figurative use has increased in recent decades.<br /><br />Could some of the criticism of <i>orientate</i> be due to the (mistaken) perception that it was back-formed from <i>orientation</i>? Or maybe it results from the sense that we should, wherever possible, omit needless syllables...Stanhttp://stancarey.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8377709913595182916.post-48371891002780587122010-04-18T16:39:43.335+00:002010-04-18T16:39:43.335+00:00Another pair that I haven't seen mentioned in ...Another pair that I haven't seen mentioned in usage manuals is <i>cohabit/cohabitate</i>--the <i>OED</i> marks the latter "Obs. rare" and has only one quotation from 1633. It doesn't even appear in <i>Merriam-Webster</i>. The short form wins a Google fight 378,000 to 66,200.Jonathonhttp://www.arrantpedantry.comnoreply@blogger.com