John, as a stickler for detail (you know you are . . . ), you'll appreciate that Geoff Pullum's 2002 Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (co-author Rodney Huddleston) beat Merriam-Webster to the acknowledgement that "preposition stranding" is poppycock. Page 627 of the 1842 page tome declares: "There has been a long prescriptive tradition of condemning preposition stranding as grammatically incorrect . . . " As you mention in your NYT piece, Pullum and Huddleston likewise point to John Dryden as the originator, adding that Dryden created the rule "ex nihilo in 1672 . . . " when objecting to ". . . Ben Johnson's 1611 phrase 'the bodies that those souls were freighted from.'" I have not read the Cambridge Grammar cover to cover. I just happen to know this passage, having used it on occasion to defend faculty members against whom charges of incorrect usage were leveled by not-so-well-meaning parents.
It occurs to me that the prior sentence, though stuffy, seems marginally better than "faculty members who charges of incorrect usage were leveled against by not-so . . . " which seems to result in a minor preposition pile-up.
When I learned Spanish living in Mexico, I realized that, if you are in a room and you want to tell someone in a different room (or talking on the telephone) that you will soon arrive at their location, you don’t say “I’m coming!” (“¡Vengo!”) — rather, you say “I’m going!” (“Voy!”). In English, we center the receiver’s locale (where the speaker WILL
be); in Spanish, we center the speaker’s locale (where the speaker is NOW).
I believe this realm of linguistics is dikdiks — oh no, wait, that’s an African antelope. I meant deictics. :)
I thought for certain that be- could be considered in the context of ac- which you touched on briefly. But the more words I thought of, the more it sounded like something a character in a Guy Ritchie film would say; i.e. that someone was *proper* be-something. Bejeweled is not just jeweled, but someone made an effort to bejewel themselves. This was immediately apparent when you mentioned besaw. My mind went to behold. As if it were a command. Behold! If you found your cat beneath the couch, I get the connotation that it made an effort to get beneath. If your coat was bedraggled, or you were beclowned at work, somebody did a proper number on you. Anyway, I just subscribed so that I could bewitch you.
I'm going to listen to this one again, but it must take some practice to be able to hear the similarities in some of the sounds you mentioned. Or perhaps one just has to understand the similarities in how the sounds are produced to be able to detect the similarities. You're right though that some of the evolution of these various words is not at all what one would have expected. Very Interesting episode! Thank you, Professor McWhorter.
Off topic, but I think that this is important and a very good example as to why people need to listen to relevant experts and research what they're going to tell others before they speak.
He may have meant that no vaccines against the coronaviruses that cause the common cold have been successful as there are over 150 viruses that cause the common cold. The SARS-CoV-2 virus was specifically targeted because it was new and so was deadly to certain people whereas the others are not.
Regarding all things virus and virology, including Covid-19, I suggest everyone listen to Vincent Racaniello's podcast This Week in Virology at microbe.tv/twiv and read Paul Offit's Beyond the Noise (https://pauloffit.substack.com/) for evidence and data backed information. Words matter, especially in a period of time that has so many problems caused by lies and misinformation. There are NOT two sides to everything, there is but one objective reality.
John, we've missed you.
John, as a stickler for detail (you know you are . . . ), you'll appreciate that Geoff Pullum's 2002 Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (co-author Rodney Huddleston) beat Merriam-Webster to the acknowledgement that "preposition stranding" is poppycock. Page 627 of the 1842 page tome declares: "There has been a long prescriptive tradition of condemning preposition stranding as grammatically incorrect . . . " As you mention in your NYT piece, Pullum and Huddleston likewise point to John Dryden as the originator, adding that Dryden created the rule "ex nihilo in 1672 . . . " when objecting to ". . . Ben Johnson's 1611 phrase 'the bodies that those souls were freighted from.'" I have not read the Cambridge Grammar cover to cover. I just happen to know this passage, having used it on occasion to defend faculty members against whom charges of incorrect usage were leveled by not-so-well-meaning parents.
It occurs to me that the prior sentence, though stuffy, seems marginally better than "faculty members who charges of incorrect usage were leveled against by not-so . . . " which seems to result in a minor preposition pile-up.
When I learned Spanish living in Mexico, I realized that, if you are in a room and you want to tell someone in a different room (or talking on the telephone) that you will soon arrive at their location, you don’t say “I’m coming!” (“¡Vengo!”) — rather, you say “I’m going!” (“Voy!”). In English, we center the receiver’s locale (where the speaker WILL
be); in Spanish, we center the speaker’s locale (where the speaker is NOW).
I believe this realm of linguistics is dikdiks — oh no, wait, that’s an African antelope. I meant deictics. :)
I thought for certain that be- could be considered in the context of ac- which you touched on briefly. But the more words I thought of, the more it sounded like something a character in a Guy Ritchie film would say; i.e. that someone was *proper* be-something. Bejeweled is not just jeweled, but someone made an effort to bejewel themselves. This was immediately apparent when you mentioned besaw. My mind went to behold. As if it were a command. Behold! If you found your cat beneath the couch, I get the connotation that it made an effort to get beneath. If your coat was bedraggled, or you were beclowned at work, somebody did a proper number on you. Anyway, I just subscribed so that I could bewitch you.
I'm going to listen to this one again, but it must take some practice to be able to hear the similarities in some of the sounds you mentioned. Or perhaps one just has to understand the similarities in how the sounds are produced to be able to detect the similarities. You're right though that some of the evolution of these various words is not at all what one would have expected. Very Interesting episode! Thank you, Professor McWhorter.
Off topic, but I think that this is important and a very good example as to why people need to listen to relevant experts and research what they're going to tell others before they speak.
At 50:45 of John McWhorter & Clifton Duncan – Ideology is Killing American Theater (https://glennloury.substack.com/p/john-mcwhorter-and-clifton-duncan?publication_id=259044&post_id=143604398&r=7509d&triedRedirect=true) Clifton says that there "has never been a successful vaccine for any coronavirus". This is patently false. The mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 was and is successful at reducing the severity of illness and risk of death due to Covid-19. This is because the vaccine was designed against the SARS-CoV-2 virus only.
He may have meant that no vaccines against the coronaviruses that cause the common cold have been successful as there are over 150 viruses that cause the common cold. The SARS-CoV-2 virus was specifically targeted because it was new and so was deadly to certain people whereas the others are not.
Regarding all things virus and virology, including Covid-19, I suggest everyone listen to Vincent Racaniello's podcast This Week in Virology at microbe.tv/twiv and read Paul Offit's Beyond the Noise (https://pauloffit.substack.com/) for evidence and data backed information. Words matter, especially in a period of time that has so many problems caused by lies and misinformation. There are NOT two sides to everything, there is but one objective reality.