Macropterous & Brachypterous

Macropterous (pronounced muh-krop-ter-uhs)

(1) In zoology (mostly in ornithology, ichthyology & entomology), having long or large wings or fins.

(2) In engineering, architecture and design, a structure with large, untypical or obvious “wings” or “fins”.

Late 1700s: The construct was macro- +‎ -pterous.  Macro is a word-forming element meaning “long, abnormally large, on a large scale”, from the French, from the Medieval Latin, from the Ancient Greek μακρός (makrós), a combining form of makrós (long) (cognate with the Latin macer (lean; meager)), from the primitive Indo-European root mak (long, thin).  In English it is used as a general purpose prefix meaning “big; large version of”).  The English borrowing from French appears as early as the sixteenth century but it tended to be restricted to science until the early 1930s when there was an upsurge in the publication of material on economics during the Great Depression (ie as “macroeconomy” and its derivatives).  It subsequently became a combining form meaning large, long, great, excessive et al, used in the formation of compound words, contrasting with those prefixed with micro-.  In computing, it covers a wide vista but describes mostly relatively short sets of instructions used within programs, often as a time-saving device for the handling of repetitive tasks, one of the few senses in which macro (although originally a clipping in 1959 of “macroinstruction”) has become a stand-alone word rather than a contraction.  Other examples of use include macrophotography (photography of objects at or larger than actual size without the use of a magnifying lens (1863)), macrospore (in botany, "a spore of large size compared with others (1859)), macroeconomics (pertaining to the economy as a whole (1938), macrobiotic (a type of diet (1961)), macroscopic (visible to the naked eye (1841)), macropaedia (the part of an encyclopaedia Britannica where entries appear as full essays (1974)) and macrophage (in pathology "type of large white blood cell with the power to devour foreign debris in the body or other cells or organisms" (1890)).

The –pterous suffix was from the Ancient Greek, the construct being πτερ(όν) (pter(ón) (feather; wing), from the primitive Indo-European péthr̥ (feather) and related to πέτομαι (pétomai) (I fly) (and (ultimately), the English feather) +‎ -ous.  In zoology (and later, by extension, in engineering and design), it was appended to words from taxonomy to mean (1) having wings and (2) having large wings.  Later, it was used also of fins.  The –ous suffix was from the Middle English -ous, from the Old French –ous & -eux, from the Latin -ōsus (full, full of); a doublet of -ose in an unstressed position.  It was used to form adjectives from nouns to denote (1) possession of (2) presence of a quality in any degree, commonly in abundance or (3) relation or pertinence to.  In chemistry, it has a specific technical application, used in the nomenclature to name chemical compounds in which a specified chemical element has a lower oxidation number than in the equivalent compound whose name ends in the suffix -ic.  For example, sulphuric acid (H₂SO₄) has more oxygen atoms per molecule than sulphurous acid (H₂SO₃).  The comparative is more macropterous and the superlative most macropterous.  Macropterous & macropteran are adjectives and macropter & macroptery are nouns; the noun plural is macropters.

Google ngram: Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

Brachypterous (pronounced bruh-kip-ter-uhs)

In zoology (mostly in ornithology & entomology), having short, incompletely developed or otherwise abbreviated wings (defined historically as being structures which, when fully folded, do not reach to the base of the tail.long or large wings or fins.

Late 1700s: The construct was brachy- + -pterous.  The brachy- prefix was from the Ancient Greek βραχύς (brakhús) (short), from the Proto-Hellenic brəkús, from the primitive Indo-European mréǵus (short, brief).  The cognates included the Sanskrit मुहुर् (múhur) & मुहु (múhu), the Avestan m̨ərəzu.jīti (short-lived), the Latin brevis, the Old English miriġe (linked ultimately to the English “merry”) and the Albanian murriz.  It was appended to convey (1) short, brief and (2) short, small.  Brachypterous & brachypteran are adjectives and brachyptery & braˈchypterism are nouns.  The comparative would be more brachypterous and the superlative most brachypterous but because of the nature of the base word, that would seem unnatural.  The noun brachypter does not means “a brachypterous creature; it describes taeniopterygid stonefly of the genus Brachyptera”.

The European Chinch Bug which exists in both macropterous (left) and brachypterous (right) form; Of the latter, entomologists also use the term "micropterous" and use does seem interchangeable but within the profession there may be fine distinctions. 

The difference in the use of macropterous (long wings or fins) and brachypterous (short wings) is accounted for less by the etymological roots than the application and traditions of use.  In zoological science, macropterous was granted a broad remit and came to be used of any creature (form the fossil record as well as the living) with long wings (use most prevalent of insects) and water-dwellers with elongated fins.  The word was applied first to birds & insects before being used of fish (fins being metaphorical “wings” and in environmentally-specific function there is much overlap.  By extension, in the mid-twentieth century, macropterous came to be used in engineering, architecture and design including of cars, airframes and missiles.

Brachypterous (short wings) is used almost exclusively in zoology, particularly entomology, the phenomenon being much more common than among birds which, being heavier, rely for lift on wings with a large surface area.  Short wing birds do exist but many are flightless (the penguin a classic example where the wings are used in the water as fins (for both propulsion and direction)) and this descriptor prevails.  Brachypterous is less flexible in meaning because tightly it is tied to a specific biological phenomenon; essentially a “short fin” in a fish is understood as “a fin”.  Cultural and linguistic norms may also have been an influence in that while “macro-” is widely used a prefix denoting “large; big”, “brachy-” has never entered general used and remains a tool in biology.  So, in common scientific use, there’s no recognized term specifically for “short fins” equivalent to brachypterous (short wings) although, other than tradition, there seems no reason why brachypterous couldn’t be used thus in engineering & design.  If so minded, the ichthyologists could coin “brachyichthyous” (the construct being brachy- + ichthys (fish)) or brachypinnate (the construct being brachy- + pinna (“fin” or “feather” in Latin)), both meaning “short-finned fish”.  Neither seem likely to cath on however, the profession probably happy with “short-fin” or the nerdier “fin hypoplasia”.

The tailfin: the macropterous and the brachypterous

Lockheed P-38 Lightning in flight (left) and 1949 Cadillac (right).

Fins had appeared on cars during the inter-war years when genuinely they were added to assist in straight-line stability, a need identified as speeds rose.  The spread to the roads came from the beaches and salt flats where special vehicles were built to pursue the world land speed record (LSR) and by the mid 1920s, speeds in these contests were exceeding 150 mph (240 km/h) and at these velocities, straight-line stability could be a matter of life and death.  The LSR crew drew their inspiration from aviation and that field also provided the motif for Detroit’s early post-war fins, the 1949 Cadillac borrowing its tail features from the Lockheed P-38 Lightning (a US twin-boom fighter first flown in 1939 and built 1941-1945) although, despite the obvious resemblance, the conical additions to the front bumper bar were intended to evoke the image of speeding artillery shells rather than the P-38’s twin propeller bosses.

1962 Ford (England) Zodiac Mark III (left) and 1957 DeSoto Firesweep two-door hardtop (right).

From there, the fins grew although it wasn’t until in 1956 when Chrysler released the next season’s rage that extravagance truly began.  To one extent or another, all Chrysler’s divisions (Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler, Imperial) adopted the macropterous look and the public responded to what was being described in the press as “futuristic” or “jet-age” (Sputnik had yet to orbit the earth; “space-age” would soon come) with a spike in the corporation’s sales and profits.  The competition took note and it wasn’t long before General Motors (GM) responded (by 1957 some Cadillac fins were already there) although, curiously Ford in the US was always tentative about the fin and their interpretation was always rather brachypterous (unlike their English subsidiary which added surprisingly prominent fins to their Mark III Zephyr & Zodiac (1961-1966).

Macropterous: Lindsay Lohan with wings, generated with AI (artificial intelligence) by Stable Diffusion.

Even at the time the fins attracted criticism although it was just as part of a critique of the newer cars as becoming too big and heavy with a notable level of inefficiency (increasing fuel consumption and little (if any) increase in usable passenger space with most of the bulk consumed by the exterior dimensions, some created by apparently pointless styling features of which the big fins were but one.  The public continued to buy the big cars (one did get a lot of metal for the money) but there was also a boom in the sales of both imported cars (their smaller size among their many charms) but the corporation which later became AMC (American Motor Corporation) enjoyed good business for their generally smaller offerings.  Chrysler and GM ignored Ford’s lack of commitment to the macropterous and during the late 1950s their fin continued to grow upwards (and, in some cases, even outwards) but, noting the flood of imports, decided to join the trend, introducing smaller ranges; whereas in 1955, the majors offered a single basic design, by 1970 there would be locally manufactured “small cars”, sub-compacts”, “compacts” and “intermediates” as well as what the 1955 (which mostly had been sized somewhere between a “compact” and an “intermediate”) evolved into (now named “full-size”, a well-deserved appellation).

1959 Cadillac with four-window hardtop coachwork (the body-style known also as the "flattop" or "flying wing roof") (left) and 1961 Imperial Crown Convertible (right).

It was in 1959-1961 that things became “most macropterous” (peak fin) and the high-water mark of the excess to considered by most to be the 1959 Cadillac, east of the towering fins adorned with a pair of taillights often described as “bullet lights” but, interviewed year later, a member of the General Motors Technical Center (opened in 1956 and one of the mid-century’s great engines of planned obsolescence) claimed the image they had in mind was the glowing exhaust from a rocket in ascent, then often seen in popular culture including film, television and advertising.  However, although a stylistic high, it was the 1961 Imperials which set the mark literally, the tip of those fins standing almost a half inch (12 mm) taller and it was remembered too for the “neo-classical” touch of four free-standing headlights, something others in the industry declined to follow.

Tending to the brachypterous: As the seasons went by, the Cadillac's fins would retreat but would not for decades wholly vanish.

It’s a orthodoxy in the history of design that the fins grew to the point of absurdity and then vanished but that’s not what literally happened in all cases.  Some manufacturers indeed suddenly abandon the motif but Cadillac, perhaps conscious of having nurtured (and in a sense “perfected”) the debut of the 1949 range must have felt more attached because, after 1959, year after year, the fins would become smaller and smaller although decades later, vestigial fins were still obviously part of the language of design.  In Europe, others would also prune.

Macropterous to brachypterous.  Sunbeam Alpine: 1960 Series I (left) and 1966 Series V. 

Built in five series between 1959-1968, the fins on the Sunbeam Alpine would have seemed a good idea in 1957 when the lines were approved but trend didn’t persist and with the release in 1964 of the revised Series IV, the effect was toned down, the restyling achieved in an economical way by squaring off the rake at the rear, this lowering the height of the tips.  Because the release of the Series IV coincided with the debut of the Alpine Tiger (fitted initially with a 260 cubic inch (4.2 litre) V8 (and later a 4.7 (289)), all the V8 powered cars used the “low fin” body.

Macropterous to brachypterous. 1961 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE Lang (Long) (left) and 1971 Mercedes-Benz 280 SE 3.5 coupé.

Regarded by some as a symbol of the way the Wirtschaftswunder (the post war “economic miracle” in the FRG (Federal Republic of Germany, the old West Germany)) had ushered away austerity, the (slight) exuberance of the fins which appeared on the Mercedes-Benz W111 (1959-1968) & W112 (1961–1965) seemed almost to embarrass the company, offended by the suggestion they would indulge in a mere “styling trend”.  Although the public soon dubbed the cars the Heckflosse (literally “tail-fins”), the factory insisted they were Peilstege (parking aids or sight-lines (literally "bearing bars")), the construct being peil-, from peilen (take a bearing; find the direction) + Steg (bar) which marked the extent of the bodywork, this to assist while reversing.  That may have been true (the company has never been above a bit of myth-making) but when a coupé and cabriolet was added to the W111 & W112 range, the fins were noticeably smaller, achieving an elegance of line Mercedes-Benz has never matched.  Interestingly, a la Cadillac, when the succeeding sedans (W108-W109 (1965-1972) & W116, (1972-1979)) were released, both retained a small hint of a fin although by 1972 it wasn’t enough even to be called vestigial; the factory said the small deviation from the flat was there to increase structural rigidity.

Macropterous to brachypterous: 1962 Vanden Plas Princess 3 Litre (left) and 1967 Vanden Plas Princess 4 Litre R (right).

The Italian design house Pinninfarina took to fins in the late 1950s and applied what really were variations of the same basic design to commissions from Fiat, Lancia, Peugeot and BMC (British Motor Corporation, a conglomerate created by merger in 1952 which brought together Morris, Austin (and soon Austin-Healey), MG, Riley, Wolseley & Vanden Plas under the one corporate umbrella.  There were a several BMC “Farinas” sold under six badges and the ones with the most prominent fins were the “big” Farinas, the most expensive of which were Princess 3 Litre (1959-1960), Vanden Plas Princess 3 Litre (1960-1964) and Vanden Plas Princess 4 Litre R (1964-1968); the “R” appended to the 4 Litre’s model name was to indicate its engine (which had begun life as a military unit) was supplied by Rolls-Royce, a most unusual arrangement.  The 4 Litre used the 3 Litre’s body with a number of changes, one of which was a change in the shape and reduction in the size of the rather chunky fins.  Although the frumpy shell remained, the restyling was though quite accomplished though obviously influenced by the Mercedes-Benz W111 & W112 coupés & cabriolets but if one is going to imitate, one should choose the finest.

Quincunx

Quincunx (pronounced kwing-kuhngks or kwin-kuhngks)

(1) An arrangement of five objects, in a square or rectangle, one at each corner and one in the middle.

(2) In formal gardening, five plants placed thus as part of a design,

(3) In forestry, as a baseline pattern, five trees planted in such a shape.

(4) In botany, an overlapping arrangement of five petals or leaves, in which two are interior, two are exterior, and one is partly interior and partly exterior (described as a “quincuncial arrangement” of sepals or petals in the bud.

(5) The pattern of the five-spot on dice, playing cards and dominoes.

(6) In the history of numismatics, a bronze coin minted during the Roman Republic, valued at five-twelfths of an as (five times the value of the uncia); it was marked with five dots.

(7) In geometry, an angle of five-twelfths of a circle.

(8) In astrology An angle of five-twelfths of a circle (or 150°) between two objects (usually planets).

1640s: From the Latin quīncunx (the basis for the construct being quīnque +‎ uncia) which translates literally as “five twelfths”, a reference to a bronze coin minted (circa 211–200 BC) with a five dot pattern and issued by the Roman Republic; it was valued at five twelfths of an as (the Roman standard bronze coin).  Descendants from the Latin include the English quincunx, the French quinconce, the German Quinkunx, the Spanish quincunce and the Portuguese quincunce.  Quinque (the numeric five (5)) was from the From Proto-Italic kwenkwe, from the primitive Indo-European pénkwe, the cognates including the Sanskrit पञ्चन् (páñcan), the Ancient Greek πέντε (pénte), the Old Armenian հինգ (hing), the Gothic fimf and the Old English fīf (from which English ultimately gained “five”).  The basis of the construct of the Latin uncia may have been ūnicus (unique) (from ūnus (one), from the primitive Indo-European óynos) in the sense of twelfths making up the base unit of various ancient systems of measurement) +‎ -ia.  Not all etymologists agree and some prefer a link with the Ancient Greek ὀγκία (onkía) (uncia), from ὄγκος (ónkos) (weight).  Uncia was the name of various units including (1) the Roman ounce (one-twelfth of a Roman pound), (2) the Roman inch (one-twelfth of a Roman foot), (3) a bronze coin minted by the Roman Republic (one-twelfth of an as), (a Roman unit of land area (one-twelfth of a jugerum)) and in the jargon of apothecaries became a synonym of ounce (the British & American avoirdupois unit of mass); it was generally a synonym of twelfth.  In algebra, it was a (now obsolete) numerical coefficient in a binomial.  Quīnque was the source of many modern Romance words for “five” including the French cinq and the Spanish cinco; uncia was the source of both “inch” and “ounce”.  Quincunx is a noun, quincuncial is an adjective and quincuncially is an adverb; the noun plural is quincunxes or quincunces.

Quincunx garden, Wyken Hall, Suffolk, England.

When first it entered English in the 1640s, “quincunx” existed only in the vocabulary of astrologers (astrology then still a respectable science) and it was used to describe planetary alignments at a distance of five signs from one another.  By the 1640s it had migrated to mathematics (particularly geometry) where it was used to define “an arrangement of five objects in a square, one at each corner and one in the middle”, familiar in the five pips on a playing card or spots on a di).  In the 1660s (possibly from dice or cards rather than the fortune-tellers), it was picked up by gardeners to describe the layout of a section of a formal garden in which one plant or shrub was placed at each corner of a square or rectangle with a fifth exactly in the centre (an arrangement in two sets of oblique rows at right angles to each other, a sense known also in the original Latin.  In forestry, use began (as a layout tool for new plantings) early in the eighteenth century.

Lindsay Lohan (born 2 July 1986) joins a list of the illustrious with a Mercury Quincunx MC (a planetary alignment where Mercury is 150^o apart from the Medium Coeli (a Latin phrase which translates as “Midheaven” (“MC” in the jargon of astrologers).  In explaining the significance of the Quincunx MC, the planetary soothsayers note than when two planets lie 150^o apart, “tension is created due to their lack of natural understanding or relation.”  The MC is the point where the cusp of the tenth house is found on a natal (birth) and the MC sign signifies  “one’s public persona”.  Now we know.

Fluffy dice in 1974 Ford Mustang II (left), the color of the dashboard molding emblematic of what was happening in the 1970s.    In continuous production over seven generations since 1964, the Mustang II (1973-1979) is the least fondly remembered iteration (uniquely among Mustangs, in its first season a V8 engine was not even optional) but, introduced some weeks before the first oil embargo was imposed in 1973, it was a great sales success and exceeded the company’s expectations.  Unlike at least some of the models in all other generations, the Mustang II is a classic “Malaise era” car and not a collectable in the conventional sense of the word although they do have a residual value because the front sub-frame with its rack & pinion steering and flexible engine accommodation is prized for all sort of purposes and many have been cannibalized for this assembly alone.  Fluffy dice are available also in designer colors (right) and as well as the familiar dots, there are some with hearts, skulls, handguns, eyes and dollar signs.  Probably, the Mustang II and fluffy dice are a perfect match.

Although the five-dot pattern on a di is known in the industry as the quincunx, the other five faces enjoy rather more prosaic descriptions and most just use the number:

1 (single dot, at the center of the face): The “center dot” or “monad”.

2 (two dots, diagonally opposite each other): The “diagonal pair”.

3 (three dots, forming a diagonal line): The “diagonal trio”.

4 (four dots, arranged in a square pattern: The “square” or “quadrant”.

6 (six dots, arranged in two parallel vertical lines of three dots each): The “double row” or “paired trios”.

US Army five star insignia of (General of the Army) Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969; US president 1953-1961).

The quincunx was one of the layouts considered in 1944 when, for the first time, the US military created five star ranks in the army and navy (there would not be a separate USAF (US Air Force) until 1947).  Eventually a pentagrammatic circle of stars was preferred but the aesthetics of epaulettes were the least of the problems of protocol, the military been much concerned with history and tradition and the tangle wasn’t fully combed out until 1976 when the Congress, the White House, and the Pentagon, acting in succession, raised George Washington (1732–1799; first president of the United States, 1789-1797) to the rank of five star general (he’d retired as a (three star) lieutenant general), back-dating the appointment so he’d for all time be the military’s senior officer.  In 1944, there was also an amusing footnote which, according to legend, resulted in the decision to use the style “general” and not “Marshal” (as many militaries do) because the first to be appointed was George Marshall (1880–1959; US Army chief of staff 1939-1945) and it was thought “Marshal Marshall” would be a bit naff, something Joseph Heller’s (1923-1999) “Major Major” in Catch-22 (1961) would prove.

The quincunx induction system, the Cadillac Le Monstre and the 24 Heures du Mans, 1950

Living up to the name: The 1950 Cadillac Le Monstre.

The two Cadillacs which in 1950 raced at Le Mans were mechanically similar but visually, could have been from different planets.  The more conventional Petit Pataud was a Series 61 coupe with only minor modification and it gained its nickname (the translation “clumsy puppy” best captures the spirit) because to the French it looked a lumbering thing but, as its performance in the race would attest, Cadillac’s new 331 cubic inch (5.4 litre) V8 (which would grow to 429 cubic inches (7.0 litres) before it was retired in 1967) meant it was faster than it looked.  Underneath the second entrant (Le Monstre obviously needing no translation but used in the sense of “monstrosity” rather than “large”) there was also a Series 61 but the body had been replaced by something more obviously aerodynamic although few, then or now, would call it “conventionally attractive”.  Although Le Monstre seemed very much in the tradition of the “cucumber-shaped” Mercedes-Benz SSKL which had won the 1932 race at Berlin’s unique AVUS circuit, the lines were the result of testing a one twelfth (Uncia in the Latin) scale wooden model in a wind-tunnel used usually to optimize the shape crop dusters and other slow-flying airplanes.  Presumably that explains the resemblance to a section of an airplane’s wing (a shape designed to encourage lift), something which would have been an issue had higher speeds been attained but even on the long (6 km (3.7 mile)) Mulsanne Straight, there was in 1950 enough power only to achieve around 210 km/h (130) mph although as a drag-reduction exercise it must have contributed to the 22 km/h (13 mph) advantage it enjoyed over Petit Pataud, something Le Monstre’s additional horsepower alone could not have done and remarkably, even with the minimalist aluminium skin it wasn’t much lighter than the standard-bodied coupe because this was no monocoque; the robust Cadillac chassis was retained with a tube-frame added to support the panels and provide the necessary torsional stiffness.

Le Monstre's 331 cubic inch V8 with its unusual (and possibly unique) five-carburetor induction system in a quincunx layout.

Some of the additional horsepower came from the novel "quincunx" induction system.  Le Monstre’s V8 was configured with five carburettors, the idea being that by use of progressive throttle-linkages, when ultimate performance wasn’t required the car would run on a single (central) carburettor, the other four summoned on demand and in endurance racing, improved fuel economy can be more valuable than additional power.  That’s essentially how most four-barrel carburettors worked, two venturi usually providing the feed with all four opened only at full throttle and Detroit would later refine the model by applying “méthode Le Monstre” to the triple carburettor systems many used between 1957-1971.  As far as is known, the only time a manufacturer flirted with the idea of a five carburetor engine was Rover which in the early 1960s was experimenting with a 2.5 (153 cubic inch) litre in-line five cylinder which was an enlargement of their 2.0 litre (122 cubic inch) four.  Fuel-injection was the obvious solution but the systems then were prohibitively expensive (for the market segment Rover was targeting) so the prototypes ended up with two carburettors feeding three cylinders and one the other two, an arrangement as difficult to keep in tune as it sounds.  Rover’s purchase of the aluminium 3.5 litre (214 cubic inch) V8 abandoned by General Motors (GM) meant the project was terminated and whatever the cylinder count, mass-produced fuel injection later made any configuration possible.  Five carburettors wasn’t actually the highest count seen in the pre fuel-injection era, Ferrari and Lamborghini both using six (done also by motorcycle manufacturers such as Honda and Benelli) and Moto-Guzzi in the 1950s fielded a 500 cm³ Grand-Prix bike with the memorable component count of 8 cylinders, 4 camshafts, 16 valves & 8 carburetors.  The early prototypes of Daimler’s exquisite hemi-head V8s (1959-1969) were also built with eight carburettors because the original design was based on a motorcycle power-plant, the reason why they were planned originally as air-cooled units.

Le Monstre ahead of Petit Pataud, Le Mans, 1950.  At the fall of the checkered flag, the positions were reversed. 

Motor racing is an unpredictable business and, despite all the effort lavished on Le Monstre, in the 1950 Le Mans 24 hour, it was the less ambitious Petit Pataud which did better, finishing a creditable tenth, the much modified roadster coming eleventh having lost many laps while being dug from the sand after an unfortunate excursion from the track.  Still, the results proved the power and reliability of Cadillac’s V8 and Europe took note: over the next quarter century a whole ecosystem would emerge, crafting high-priced trans-Atlantic hybrids which combined elegant European coachwork with cheap, powerful, reliable US V8s, the lucrative fun lasting until the first oil crisis began in 1973.

Erwartangsborizont

Erwartangsborizont (pronounced eah-wah-tum-swar-eh-sont)

(1) In English use, as “horizon of expectations”, a term from literary theory to denote the criteria readers use to judge texts in any given period.

(2) The conceivable content of a literary work or text based on the context of the time of publication (German).

(3) In formal education, the specified performance required in an examination situation (German).

Circa 1944: German determinative compound using the nouns Erwartung (expectation) and Horizont (horizon) with the connecting element “s”.  In German use, in the context of formal education, while not exactly synonymous, (1) solution expectation, (2) solution proposal & (3) sample solution impart a similar meaning.  Erwartangsborizont is a masculine noun; the noun plural is Erwartungshorizonte.  In German, both the spelling of the word and the article preceding the word can change depending on whether it is in the nominative, accusative, genitive, or dative case, thus the declension (in grammar the categorization of nouns, pronouns, or adjectives according to the inflections they receive) is:

Erwartangsborizont: a word which rose with post-modernism.

Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

The German compound noun term Erwartangsborizont was popularized in the 1960s by Hans Robert Jauss (1921-1997) and he used it to denote the criteria which readers use to judge literary texts in any given period; he first fully explained the term in Literaturgeschichte als Provokation der Literaturwissenschaft (Literary History as a Challenge to Literary Theory (1967)).  Jauss was a German academic who worked in the field of Rezeptionsästhetik (reception theory) as well as medieval and modern French literature; Erwartangsborizont (his concept of “horizon of expectation”) was his most enduring contribution to literary theory and his pre-scholarly background could in itself be used as something of a case study in his readers’ “horizon of expectation”: During World War II (1939-1945), Jauss served in both the SS and Waffen-SS.

Hans Robert Jauß: Youth, War and Internment (2016) by Jens Westemeier (b 1966), pp 367, Konstanz University Press (ISBN-13: 978-3835390829).

The SS (ᛋᛋ in Armanen runes; Schutzstaffel (literally “protection squadron” but translated variously as “protection squad”, “security section" etc)) was formed (under different names) in 1923 as a Nazi party squad to provide security at public meetings (then often rowdy and violet affairs), later evolving into a personal bodyguard for Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945).  The SS name was adopted in 1925 and during the Third Reich the institution evolved into a vast economic, industrial and military apparatus (more than two million strong), to the point where some historians (and contemporaries) regarded it as a kind of “state within a state”.  The Waffen-SS (armed SS (ie equipped with heavy weapons)) existed on a small scale as early as 1933 before Hitler’s agreement was secured to create a formation at divisional strength and growth was gradual even after the outbreak of hostilities in 1939 until the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 triggered an expansion into a multi-national armoured force with over 900,000 men under arms deployed in a variety of theatres.  As well as the SS’s role in the administration of the many concentration and extermination camps, the Waffen-SS in particular was widely implicated in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

His service in the SS and Waffen-SS included two winters spent on the Russian Front with all that implies but it wouldn’t be until 1995 the documents relating to his conduct in the occupied territories were published and historians used the papers to prove the persona he’d created during the post-war years had been constructed with obfuscation, lies and probably much dissembling.  Despite that, Jauss had been dead for almost two decades before an investigation revealed he’d falsified documents from the era as was probably implicated in war crimes committed by the SS & Waffen-SS on the Eastern Front.

Portrait of Martin Heidegger, oil on canvas by Michael Newton (b 1970).

Although the influence of philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) has attracted much comment because of his flirtation with the Nazis, the most significant intellectual impact on Jauss was the German philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer (1900-2002) who, although he lived to an impressive 102, was precluded by ill heath from serving in the military in either of the world wars.  Gadamer's most notable contribution to philosophy was to build on Heidegger’s concept of “philosophical hermeneutics” (an embryonic collection of theories about the interpretation of certain texts) and these Gardamer expanded and developed in Wahrheit und Methode (Truth and Method (1960)).  The title was significant because Gadamer argued “truth” and “method” (as both were understood within the social sciences) were oppositional forces because what came to be called truth came to be dictated by whichever method of analysis was applied to a text: “Is there to be no knowledge in art? Does not the experience of art contain a claim to truth which is certainly different from that of science, but just as certainly is not inferior to it? And is not the task of aesthetics precisely to ground the fact that the experience of art is a mode of knowledge of a unique kind, certainly different from that sensory knowledge which provides science with the ultimate data from which it constructs the knowledge of nature, and certainly different from all moral rational knowledge, and indeed from all conceptual knowledge — but still knowledge, i.e., conveying truth?”

Portrait of Hans-Georg Gadamer, oil on canvas by Dora Mittenzwei (b 1955).

The aspect of what Heidegger and Gardamer built which most interested Jauss was what he came to call the “aesthetics of reception” a term which designates the shared set of assumptions which can be attributed to any given generation of readers and these criteria can be used to assist “in a trans-subjective way”, the formation of a judgment of a text.  The point was that over time (which, depending on circumstances, can mean over decades or overnight), for both individuals and societies, horizons of expectation change.  In other words, the judgment which at one time was an accepted orthodoxy may later come to be seem a quaint or inappropriate; the view of one generation does not of necessity become something definitive and unchanging.  Jauss explained this by saying: “A literary work is not an object which stands by itself and which offers the same face to each reader in each period.  It is not a monument which reveals its timeless essence in a monologue.”  He may or may not have been thinking about German society’s changing view of his military career (and his post-war representation of it was itself something of a literary work) but the point was that people reinterpret texts in the light of their own knowledge and experience (their “cultural environment”).

That set of processes he described as constructing a literary value measured according to “aesthetic distance”, the degree to which a work departs from the Erwartangsborizont (horizon of expectations) of earlier readers.  One reviewer summarized things by suggesting the horizon of expectations was “detectable through the textual strategies (genre, literary allusion, the nature of fiction and of poetical language) which confirm, modify, subvert or ironize the expectations of readers” while aesthetic distance becomes a measure of literary value, “creating creating a spectrum on one end of which lies 'culinary' (totally consumable) reading, and, on the other, works which have a radical effect on their readers.”.  In the arcane world of literary theory, more than one commentator described that contribution as: “helpful”.  Opinions may differ.

The term “horizon of expectations” obviously is related to the familiar concept of the “cultural context”, both concepts dealing with the ways in which texts are understood within a specific time, place, and cultural framework.  To academics in the field, they are not wholly synonymous but for general readers of texts they certainly appear so.  The elements of the models are the sets of norms, values, conventions, and assumptions that a particular audience brings to a text at a given moment in time and space, expectations shaped by cultural, historical, and literary contexts but in academia the focus specifically is on the audience's interpretive framework.  The processes are dynamic in that although what happens externally can contribute to determining how a work is received and understood by its audience, if a work conforms to or challenges these expectations, it influences its reception and the potential for the work to reshape those horizons; it’s not exactly symbiotic but certainly it’s interactive.

Cady's Map by Janis Ian.

A film is just another piece of text and what is variously acceptable, funny, confronting or shocking to one generation might be viewed entirely differently by those which follow.  The faction names of the cliques at North Shore High School (Mean Girls, Paramount Pictures 2004)) were Actual Human Beings, Anti-Plastics, The Art Freaks, Asexual Band Geeks, Asian Nerds, Burnouts, Cheerleaders, Cool Asians, Desperate Wannabes, Freshmen, Girls Who Eat Their Feelings, J.V. Cheerleaders, J.V. Jocks, Junior Plastics, Preps, ROTC Guys, Sexually Active Band Geeks, The Plastics, Unfriendly Black Hotties, Unnamed Girls Who Don't Eat Anything & Varsity Jocks and given the way sensitivities have evolved, it’s predictable some of those names wouldn’t today be used; the factions' membership rosters might be much the same but some terms are now proscribed in this context, the threshold test for racism now its mere mention, racialism banished to places like epidemiological research papers tracking the distribution of obesity, various morbidities and such. 

Snoot

Snoot (pronounced snoot)

(1) In slang, the nose (of humans, animals, geological formations, distant galaxies and anything else with a feature even vaguely “nose-like”).

(2) In slang, an alcoholic drink.

(3) In slang, a police officer (especially a plain-clothed detective, the use explained by the notion of police “sticking their noses into” things).

(4) In clothing, the peak of a cap.

(5) In photography and film production, a cylindrical or conical e-shaped fitment on a studio light to control the scene area illuminated by restricting spill light.

(6) In informal use, a snob; an elitist individual; one who looks down upon those “not of the better classes”.

(7) In linguistics, a language pedant or snob; one who practices linguistic elitism (and distinct from a “grammar Nazi”).

(8) In engineering, as “droop snoot”, a design in which the nose of a machine is lowered (temporarily or permanently) for reasons of visibility or to optimize aerodynamics.

(9) To behave disdainfully toward; to condescend to (usually as “snooty”).

(10) To apply a snoot attachment to a light.

1861: From the Scots snoot (a variation of snout (nose or projecting feature of an animal), from the Middle English snowte, from the Middle Dutch snute, ultimately from the Proto-West Germanic snūt, from the Proto-Germanic snūtaz, source also of the German Schnauze (the basis of schnauzer, a name for a type of dog) and it’s presumed the slang schnoz (a nose, especially if large) is probably related.  Snoot is a noun & verb, snootiness, snooter & snootful are nouns, snooting & snooted are verbs, snooty, snootier & snootiest are adjectives and snootily is an adverb; the noun plural is snoots.

Lindsay Lohan's snoot.

The noun snootful dates from 1885 and was a synonym of skinful (to have imbibed as much liquor as one could manage).  It was based on the use of snout to mean “an an alcoholic drink” whereas skinful was an allusion to the time when wine was transported in containers made from animal skin (ie in original use skinful meant “the container is full”).  The adjective snooty (proud, arrogant) was first noted as university student slang in 1918 and presumably was in some way related to the earlier snouty (insolent, overbearing) which was in use by at least 1857, doubtlessly on the basis of “looking down one's nose at someone or something”.  In dialectal or slang use a snout (in the sense of “nose” is not of necessity derogatory and in fields like engineering, cosmology, geography, geology, cosmology or zoology, it is merely descriptive.  However, when used as a slang term for a snob (a snooty person), the sense is almost always negative although there are some elitists who are proud of their snootiness.  Those who don’t approve of barbarisms such as country & western music sometimes make sure their snootiness is obvious but as a general principle it’s usually better just to ignore such things.  The adjective snooty is in much more common use than the noun snoot and it appears often with a modifier such as “a bit snooty”.  That may seem strange because one is either snooty about someone or something or one isn’t but there are degrees of severity with which one can allow ones snootiness to manifest (the comparative “snootier”, the superlative “snootiest”.

In engineering, “droop snout” is used to describe a design in which the nose of a machine is lowered (temporarily or permanently) for reasons of visibility or to optimize aerodynamics.  The term was apparently first used between engineers in the late 1950s while working on the first conceptual plans for the Anglo-French supersonic airliner which became the Concorde although the first known use in print dates from 1963 (“droop nose” appearing in the same era).  The idea wasn’t developed for use on the Concorde.  An experimental British supersonic test-bed with a droop-nose had flown as early 1954 and proved the utility of the concept by being the first jet aircraft to exceed 1000 mph (1600 km/h) in level flight, later raising the world speed record of to 1132 mph (1822 km/h), exceeding the previous mark by an impressive 310 mph (500 km/h).  In aviation, the basic idea of a sloping nose had been around for decades and one of the reasons some World War II (1939-1945) Allied fighter pilots found targeting easier in the Hawker Hurricane than the Supermarine Spitfire was the nose of the former noticeably tapered towards the front, greatly enhancing forward visibility.

How the Concorde's droop snoot was used.

On the Concorde, the droop snoot wasn’t a mere convenience.  The combination of the engineers slide-rules and wind tunnel testing had proved what the shape had to be to achieve the combination of speed and fuel economy (the latter an under-estimated aspect of the development process) but that shape also meant the pilots’ view was so obstructed during take-offs, landings and taxiing that safety was compromised.  The solution was the “droop nose” mechanism which included a moving transparent visor which retracted into the nose prior to being lowered.  At supersonic speeds, the temperatures are high and so are the stresses so much attention was devoted to “fail-safe” systems including the droop snoot because a structural failure at Mach 2 would potentially be catastrophic for the entire airframe (and obviously every soul on board).  Thus, the hydraulic systems controling the droop snoot’s movement was duplicated and, as a last resort, the pilots had access to a simple mechanical lever which would disengage the pins holding the structure in place, the apparatus afterwards gracefully (hopefully) descending into its lowered position by the simple operation of gravity.  Droop snoots appeared also on Soviet supersonic aircraft including the short-lived Tupolev Tu-144 (visually close to a Concorde clone) and the Sukhoi T-4 strategic bomber which never entered production.  Interestingly, the USAF’s (US Air Force) North American XB-70 Valkyrie (a Mach 3 experimental bomber) didn’t use a droop snoot because it was developed exclusively for high-altitude, high-speed strategic bombing missions and, being a military airplane, would only ever operate from large, controlled airbases where additional ground support systems (monitoring and guidance) negated the need for the mechanism.

1955 Ford Customline (left) and the 1967 “droop snoot” “Custaxie” (right), the construct being Cust(omline) + (Gal)axie, the unusual hybrid created by merging (some of) a 1955 Customline with a 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) Ford Galaxie V8.  The bizarre machine won the 1967 New Zealand Allcomers (a wonderful concept) saloon car championship, the modifications to the nose reckoned to be the equivalent of an additional 40-50 horsepower.

At sub-supersonic speeds, throughout the 1960s race-cars proved the virtue of the droop snoot (though a fixed rather than a moveable structure.  While sometimes weight-reduction was also attained, overwhelmingly the advantage was in aerodynamics and the idea began to spread to road cars although it would be decades before the concept would no longer be visually too radical for general market acceptance.

1972 Vauxhall Firenza coupé promotional material for the Canadian launch, a market in which the car was a disaster (left) and 1975 High Performance (HP) Firenza "dropsnoot".  GM in South Africa actually made a good car out of the Firenza coupé, building 100 (for homologation purposes) with the 302 cubic inch (4.9 litre) V8 used in the original Z/28 Chevrolet Camaro.  In South Africa, they were sold as the "Chevrolet Firenza".  

In 1973, officially, Vauxhall called their new version of the Firenza coupé the “High Performance (HP) Firenza” but quickly the press, noting the Concorde (then still three years from entering commercial service), dubbed it the “droopsnoot”, the reference obviously to the distinctive nosecone designed for aerodynamic advantage.  The advantages were real in terms of performance and fuel consumption but Vauxhall had the misfortune to introduce the model just as the first oil crisis began which stunted demand for high-performance cars (BMW’s 2002 Turbo another victim) and triggered a sharp recession which was a prelude to that decade’s stagflation.  Vauxhall had planned a build of some 10,000 a year but in the difficult environment, a paltry 204 were built.

A Ford Escort Mark 2 in the 1977 Rally of Finland (left) and a 1976 Escort RS2000  with the droop snoot (right).

In 1976, Ford launched their own take on the droop snoot, the Mark 2 Escort RS2000 featuring a similar mechanical specification to that of the Mark 1 but with a distinctive nosecone.  Ford claimed there was an aerodynamic benefit in the new nose but it was really a styling exercise designed to stimulate interest because the Escort was the corporation’s platform for rallying rather than something used on high-speed circuits and it certainly achieved the desired results, the model proving popular.  Ford Australia even offered it with four doors as well as two although emission regulations meant the additional horsepower on offer in Europe was denied to those down under.  Interestingly, although the range’s high-performance flagship, the factory rally team didn’t use the droop snoot version, those in competition using the standard, square-fronted body.

Godox Pro Snoot S-Type Mount SN-05