Search This Blog

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Vocabulary

Some people have wondered at the words I use, thinking them unusual. I was taught in elementary school and in High School and in University to acquire a good vocabulary. It has always been a problem how to talk to people. I confronted the problem and decided I could not appear to talk down to people. If they thought me to be elitist and affected, it would be better than to be seen to be patronizing and talking down to them.

I also use a dictionary published in 1932. It has a large number of archaic and obsolete meanings for words. Using it gets one back to the basics.

8 comments:

Unknown said...

Vocabulary is just the least of things that can get in the way. You run the risk of seeming elitist, if through no fault of your own, you know a lot of stuff. For instance, I'm writing a poem called "Particle Physics." Now I'm not a physicist, far from it, but I do know about quarks and their odd names (top, bottom, charm, etc.) and I do know that there are other sub-atomic particles, even if I cannot recall what they're called, and that all of them are subject to the very strange laws of quantum physics. Now, must I not write a poem that at least implicitly assumes this fairly basic acquaintance on the reader's part? (The poem of course is not about particle physics. It's about us, but you have to be on the bus to get to the next stop.)

Montag said...

You have given me an idea.........

Sorry, old pal, but it will be "The Walrus & The Carpenter" title-wise and quantum inspired like the play "Copenhagen"...

right now, it's a mish-mosh in the cranium.

Unknown said...

How odd that you should mention "The Walrus and the Carpenter"! My particle physics poem ended down Alice's rabbit hole. The poem is called "Go Ask Alice".

Montag said...

Odd?
You're kidding !
Let us go ask our wives - who, by the way, have the same names - then go for a walk with the dogs - who, by the way, are named after pharmaceuticals.

Does anyone but I know that when you refer to "The Jefferson Airplane", you are referring to "The Jefferson Davis Airplane"?

Unknown said...

Ah, but I would never have Jefferson Davis in mind, sir. As you recall my guy of interest is Little Aleck Stephens, and to say the least there was no love lost between them. I'm working an article now on another really queer duck in Confederate gray: Jubal A. Early, universally recognized and the father of the Lost Cause myth.

Montag said...

How very interesting; the South lost the war because - even though they thought themselves morally just - the North was superior in men and materiel.

Somehow even this reminds me of John Brown, in that even though there is ample evidence that the Bible that regulates slavery and does not condemn it, John Brown was inspired by his own vision.
So Jubal Early is inspired by his own story and myth of superiority.
Observe, however, that Brown's story preceded the war, whereas Early's followed it: a period of unbelievable conflict book-ended by visions and myths by men - as Oliver Wendell Holmes said - were tempered in the fires of warfare.

My point is the future: visions and things seen, and I'll come back to it in "Fight Club"

Unknown said...

There were other components of the Lost Cause myth besides the South succumbing to superior numbers and resources. Lee was a pure, virtuous demigod who was never beaten on the battlefield. Gettysburg was lost because of the perfidy of James Longstreet who did not attack early on July 2. And of course the war was about states' rights, not slavery. As you probably know, the Lost Cause myth is alive and well today. It's like crab grass. Can't kill it.

Montag said...

A good example of how intelligence creates its own reality; our minds may free us or enslave us.