Comments on: Rhetorical question of the day

By: David Duff

David Duff — Sat, 28 May 2005 03:44:00 +0000

But I’ve never seen him use a neologism. And I wasn’t really critisising, only ‘tweaking’.

By: Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett — Fri, 27 May 2005 18:52:00 +0000

Hang on. Let me get this straight. Someone is defending Oliver Kamm by attacking his critic’s use of unfamiliar words. Have you ever read what Kamm writes? He does his best to grandstand and showboat in his use of language, unfortunately producing clunkingly overwritten peices rather than the erudite poetry he must be hoping for.

By: David Duff

David Duff — Fri, 27 May 2005 15:41:00 +0000

Sorry, Jim, only just spotted it, will reply but possibly tomorrow. Sorry to our host for using his space for ‘personal’ correspondence.

By: Jim Bliss

Jim Bliss — Fri, 27 May 2005 12:04:00 +0000

Jim claims "discordant" comes from a philosophical movement

Now I get it... David's playing Chinese Whispers!

(PS: You never responded to the comment I made on your blog, David... I guess I'll have to start a "Street of Shame" of my own)

By: Larry

Larry — Fri, 27 May 2005 10:21:00 +0000

Jim claims "discordant" comes from a philosophical movement

Ye Gods.

By: David Duff

David Duff — Fri, 27 May 2005 10:07:00 +0000

Jim claims "discordant" comes from a philosophical movement ".. popularised [...] in the late 60s / early 70s." Couldn't have been that popular, or perhaps, some-one forgot to tell the OED!

And I trust that N.I.B. puts one (or three) behind the bar for me.

By: N.I.B.

N.I.B. — Fri, 27 May 2005 07:32:00 +0000

N.I.B. proves what a second-rater I am by using logic to out-manouvre me!

Woo Hoo! I think I'm going to treat myself to an afternoon in the Crow and Crag for that!

By: Jim Bliss

Jim Bliss — Fri, 27 May 2005 07:12:00 +0000

David, Orwell is indeed something of a hero of mine. I never really got on with "Animal Farm" strangely enough, but "1984" is one of my favourite novels, and his "Collected Essays" one of my favourite books.

Sadly though David, there is no "everyday English equivalent" to Discordian. Discordianism is the name of a certain school of thought / group of philosophies / religion / way of seeing the world popularised by Robert Anton Wilson and others in the late 60s / early 70s.

As it was before my time, I've never really considered it a neologism... and there's certainly no other word I could have used in it's place to make the (joke) point about Oliver Kamm being a subscriber to that particular way of thinking.

I could perhaps have fnord used a more obscure way of implying the same thing which would have gone over your head, and thereby saved you from the confusion that seems to have resulted. It's something I'll bear in mind in future. Hail Eris!

By: David Duff

David Duff — Fri, 27 May 2005 07:02:00 +0000

Yes, yes, yes, it should have been ‘too’ not "to"! I shall throw myself on my keyboard instantly.

By: David Duff

David Duff — Fri, 27 May 2005 06:59:00 +0000

I agree absolutely with Jez on the subject of the English language which is why I am not really criticisng Jim for his neologism. It so happened that, for reasons to tedious to go into here, I was re-reading Orwell’s strictures on "Politics and the English Language"(*) and noticed his rule #5: "Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent." I was teasing Jim (a regrettable habit of mine) by hitting him with one of his heroes – or at least, I assume Orwell is a hero to him.

(*) Anyone wishing read the essay should go to the always excellent http://www.aldaily.com/ and scroll down to the very last section of references on their left-hand column.

N.I.B. proves what a second-rater I am by using logic to out-manouvre me!