Asunder

Asunder (pronounced uh-suhn-der)

(1) To separate into parts; in or into pieces.

(2) Things apart or widely separated:

Pre-1000: From the Old English sundrian & syndrian (to sunder, separate, divide), from sundor (separately, apart), from the Proto-Germanic sundraz & sunder (source also of the Old Norse sundr, the Old Frisian sunder, the Old High German suntar (aside, apart) and the German sondern (to separate), from the primitive Indo-European root sen- & sene- (apart, separated (source also of the Sanskrit sanutar (away, aside), the Avestan hanare (without), the Greek ater (without), the Latin sine (without), the Old Church Slavonic svene (without) and the Old Irish sain (different)).  It was cognate with the Danish sønder, the Swedish sönder, the Dutch zonder, the German sonder, the Icelandic sundur, the Faroese sundur and the Norwegian sunder & sønder (akin to the Gothic sundrō).  The adverb asunder (into a position apart, separate, into separate parts) was a mid-twelfth century contraction of the Old English on sundran, the construct being on (preposition) + sundran (separate position) and in Middle English was used in the sense of "distinguish, tell apart".  The related forms are sundered & sundering. 

Marriage and divorce

Although it appears also in Mark 10:9, the phrase “what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” is best known from Matthew 19:6 and it became part of the Christian wedding ritual, for long preceded at some point by the injunction “should anyone present know of any reason why this couple should not be joined in holy matrimony, speak now or forever hold your peace”.

The formalization of the ritual during the middle ages reflected the medieval church’s regulation of rules within which people could marry.  By the twelfth century, the “consent theory” of marriage had emerged by which a couple married by exchanging certain words, regardless of whether witnesses or a priest was present.  If they exchanged vows without witnesses, the marriage was said to be “clandestine” and while legal (a valid, binding sacrament) it was not licit (allowed), a binary distinction that would appear in the development of the law of both contract and equity. 

Thus the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) forbid clandestine marriages and began the codification of the forms and processes of formal marriage, requiring an announcement of the impending marriage to be “…read or published on three successive Sundays prior…” to the actual ceremony to ensure that impediments to be raised, thus preventing invalid marriages.  Including this in the ceremony was a final chance to object before the marriage was declared, after which it could not be torn asunder.

Torn asunder.  The 2016 Brexit (British exit from membership of the European Union (EU)) referendum was narrowly won by the "leave" campaign.  It was a very bad outcome and one intended to serve the interests of a tiny elite, the members of which stoked the hatreds, fears and prejudices of those less socially sophisticated, inducing them to vote against their own interests.  No good will come of this.

Amid

Amid (pronounced uh-mid)

(1) In the middle of; surrounded by; among.

(2) During; in or throughout the course of.

Pre 1000: From the Middle English amidde, from the Old English amiddan, from on middan (in (the) middle), the construct being a- + mid.  The a- prefix was used to create many words (apace, astern, abeam, afire, aboil, asunder etc) but is considered now rare or no longer productive; It implied a sense of “in”, “on” or “at such a time” and was used to show those states, conditions, or manners.  It came from the Middle English a- (up, out, away), from the Old English ā- (originally ar- & or-, from the Proto-Germanic uz- (out-), from the primitive Indo-European uds- (up, out) and was cognate with the Old Saxon ā- and the German er-.  Mid and its variations in every known European language (except Icelandic) never meant anything but middle.  The root of the Modern English form is the Middle English mid & midde, from the Old English midd (mid, middle, midway), from the Proto-Germanic midjaz, from the primitive Indo-European médhyos.  It was cognate with the Dutch midden, the German Mitte, the Icelandic miður (worse, less) and the Latin medius.

Amid, amidst and among

Amid is a preposition, a type of word that shows certain kinds of relationships between other words; it has peacefully coexisted with amidst for some seven-hundred years.  Amid has two meanings, the first expresses a kind of physical relationship such as “in the middle of; surrounded by; among.”  This second sense can show a relationship between things in time or convey the idea that something is taking place against the backdrop or background of something else as in “during, in or throughout the course of.”

Amidst, dating from 1250-1300 and derived from the Middle English amiddes, means the same thing as amid and one can substitute for the other without a sentence changing meaning.  Both amid and amidst are thus correct, the former more common in both American and British English although the Americans are slightly more fond of the latter.

It’s an example of the profligacy of English, preserving two words when one would do.  Amid is the older, recorded before 1000, developing from the Old English on middan which begat first the Middle English amidde and then amid.  Amidst appeared between 1250–1300, drawn from the Middle English amides, the –s in amiddes representing a suffix English once used to form adverbs, this strange –s also producing some less common adverbs, such as unawares.  The “t” in the –st suffix is called a parasitic or excrescent –t, technical terms in phonetics to describe a sound inserted to reflect how people find it most easy to pronounce another sound, not because the added sound has any historic or grammatical reason (against, amongst, and whilst are other examples) to exist.

However, “among” is also a preposition but one with more senses than amid.  One of its meanings is “in, into, or through the midst of; in association or connection with; surrounded by” which overlaps with amid & amidst so English offers three similar words which can mean the same thing.  Among however is not wholly interchangeable with the other two.  Although “…a house amid the trees”; “…a house amidst the trees” & “a house among the trees” are all correct, it’s wrong to say either “FDR assumed the presidency among the Great Depression” or “…exercise is amid the things part of a healthy diet”.

Lindsay Lohan's strangely neglected film Among the Shadows (Momentum Pictures, 2019) was also released in some markets as The Shadow Within.  It's not known what prompted the change (although there was a film in 2007 called The Shadow Within) but the original name was certainly preferable to either Amid the Shadows or Amidst the Shadows, not because the latter two impart a different meaning but because "among" better suits the rhythm of the phrase.  "Among" probably was best; "amid" might have worked but "amidst" would have troubled some because that excrescent –t makes difficult a phonetic run-on to "the".  Given the two titles under which the film was distributed have quite different meanings, presumably either the title is incidental to the content or equally applicable.  A dark and gloomy piece about murderous werewolves and EU politicians (two quite frightening species), perhaps both work well and no reviewer appears to have commented on the matter and given the tone of the reviews, it seems unlikely there'll be a sequel to resolve things.

Director

Director (pronounced dih-rek-ter or dahy-rek-ter)

(1) A person or thing that directs others or other things (Director of Engineering, Director of Sales etc).

(2) In corporate law, one of a group of persons chosen to control or govern the affairs of a company or corporation, usually as a member of a board of directors and sometimes also including executive functions.

(3) The person responsible for the interpretive aspects of a stage, film, or television production; the person who supervises the integration of all the elements, as acting, staging, lighting etc.

(4) In musical or other artistic productions (stage, art galleries, opera etc) one in charge of all artistic (and sometimes administrative) matters (in larger operations the roles sometimes specialized: sound director, script director etc).

(5) The manager or chief executive of certain schools, institutes, government bureaux etc.

(6) In military use, a mechanical or electronic device which continuously calculates firing data for use against an airplane or other moving target, configured usually to display graphical information about in real time the targets of a weapons system.

(7) In chemistry, the common axis of symmetry of the molecules of a liquid crystal.

(8) In music, a synonym for conductor (US use, now less common).

(9) A counsellor, confessor, or spiritual guide (now less common).

1470-1480: The construct was direct(us) + -or.  A borrowing in the sense of “a guide” from the Anglo French directour & the French directeur the agent noun from the Latin dirigere (set straight, arrange; give a particular direction to) and its source, the Late Latin directorem, from the Latin dīrectus, the perfect passive participle of dīrigō (straighten, direct), the construct being dis- (asunder, in pieces, apart, in two) + regō (to direct, to guide, keep straight; make straight; rule), from the primitive Indo-European root reg (move in a straight line).  The -or suffix was from the Middle English -our, from the Old French -eor, from the Latin -ātor and reinforced by the Old French -or and its source, the Latin -tor & -tōrem.  It was used to create an agent noun, often from a verb, indicating a person or object (often machines or parts of them) that do the verb or part of speech with which they are formed.  In electrical engineering it has the specific use of being appended to the names of members of classes of components, especially those that have an extensive property name of the same root suffixed with -ance (eg to convey the sense that resistors possess resistance and inductors possess inductance).  The alternative spelling directour became rare in the late eighteenth century and is long obsolete.  Director, directorate & directorship are nouns, directing is a verb, directed is a verb & adjective, directorial is an adjective and directorially is an adverb; the noun plural is directors.  The feminine forms of the noun (directress & directrix) were always rare and are now thought extinct (and certainly proscribed).

Lindsay Lohan with Spanish fashion designer Estrella Arch (b 1974), on the catwalk at the conclusion of Emanuel Ungaro's Spring-Summer show in Paris, October 2009.  Ms Lohan was employed as a creative director at the House of Emanuel Ungaro, founded in 1965 by French fashion designer Emanuel Ungaro (1933–2019)

The noun director (corporate sense of “one of a number of persons having authority to manage the affairs of a company” was known as early as the 1630s; the theatrical sense of “the leader of a company of performers” dates from 1911 and if was from here the use was picked up by those in charge of the artistic or technical aspects of movie-making.  The noun directorship (condition or office of a director) has been in use since the 1720s, the adjective directorial (that directs) known since 1770.  The noun directorate was used first in 1834 of “a body of directors” and may immediately have be used individually of the “office of a director” but this was certainly first documented in 1837.  Director is a word defined both by its history of use (film director, director of football etc) and law (company director) so although titles like supervisor, head, manager, leader, administrator, chief, boss etc certainly implies “one who directs”, they’re traditionally not used as direct synonyms because “director” is a “loaded word”.  It’s also modified as needed (art director, managing director, sub-director etc).

1967 Imperial Crown Coupe with "Mobile Director Package"; note the rearward facing front passenger seat.  

In the years between 1955-1975, Chrysler re-created Imperial as a separate, stand-alone division within the corporation (albeit with some sharing with other divisions of engine-transmission combinations and certain other components), emulating the structure Ford used with Lincoln.  Although the approach, especially during the early years, yielded some success, the separation didn’t survive the troubled decades of the 1970s (by which time the platform and body-shells were shared with the other divisions and much of the earlier distinctiveness had been surrendered); a couple of subsequent, half-heated, revivals proved abortive.  The Imperial in 1967-1968 had actually switched from the separate frame used since 1955 to the unitary construction of the full-sized ranges offered by other divisions but maintained a certain degree of difference by virtue of a unique body, albeit one with slightly reduced dimensions from those of the previous decade.  Although styled with an elegance derived from its simplicity of line, the Imperial continued to not quite match the timeless modernity of the Lincoln or the indefinable but incomparable allure of the Cadillac and although sales did improve in 1967, the volumes were only ever a fraction of its two competitors.  The basic engineering though was sound, the TorqueFlite transmission as responsive and robust as any (although it didn’t quite slur as effortlessly between ratios as the Cadillac’s Turbo-Hydramatic) and the 440 cubic inch (7.2 litre) a notch better, something the others wouldn’t match until 1968.  Significantly, all at the time acknowledged the Imperial was the better road car although, given it operated in a market where quietness and isolation from the environment was afforded more of a premium than handling prowess, any real-world advantage in the target market was probably marginal.

The more stylish if less roadable opposition: 1967 Cadillac Coupe DeVille (left) & 1967 Lincoln Continental Coupe (right).

In those years however, the Imperial did offer something truly unique.  The “Mobile Director Package” was available exclusively on the Imperial Crown Coupe and reflected (within the limits of what the available technology would then permit) what Chrysler thought a company director would most value in an automobile being used as a kind of “office on the move” and it included: an extendable walnut-topped table which could be unfolded over the rear seats, a gooseneck (Tensor brand) high-intensity lamp which could be plugged into the cigarette lighter on either side of the car (in a sign of the times, Imperials had four cigarette lighters installed) and most intriguingly, the front passenger seat could rotate 180° to permit someone comfortably to use the table and interact with those in the rear.  All the publicity material associated with the Mobile Director Package did suggest the rearward-facing seat would likely be occupied by a director’s secretary and as one might imagine, the configuration did preclude her (and those depicted were usually women) using a lap & sash seat-belt but she would always have been in arm’s reach of at least one cigarette lighter so there was that.  The package was available only for those two seasons and in its first years cost US$597.40 (some US$5,500 adjusted for 2023 values).  The cost of the option was in 1968 reduced to US$317.60 (some US$2,800 adjusted for 2023 values) but that did little to stimulate demand, only 81 buyers of Crown Coupes ticking the box so even if the new safety regulations hadn’t outlawed the idea, it’s doubtful the Mobile Director Package would have appeared on the option list in 1969 when the new “fuselage” Imperials debuted.

Imperial's advertising always emphasised the "business" aspect of the package but the corporation also circulated a photograph of the table supporting a (presumably magnetic) chessboard and another with a bunch of grapes tumbling seductively.  The latter may have been to suggest the utility of the package when stopping for a picnic with one's secretary.  Once advertising agencies got ideas, they were hard to restrain.    

The advertising copy at the time claimed the package was “designed for the busy executive who must continue his work while he travels”, serving also as “an informal conference lounge”.  The Imperial was a big car (although the previous generations were larger still) but “lounge” was a bit of a stretch but “truth in advertising” laws were then not quite as onerous as they would become.  More accurate were the engineering details, the table able to “pivot to any of four different positions, supported by a sturdy chrome-plated pillar and in the forward position, it can convert into a padded armrest between the two front seats while extended, it opens out to twice its original size with a lever on the table swivel support to permit adjustments to the height”.  It was noted “a special tool is used for removing the table and storing it in the trunk” the unstated implication presumably that in deference to the secretary’s finger-nails, that would be a task for one’s chauffeur.  The US$597.40 the option listed at in 1967 needs to be compared with the others available and only the most elaborate of the air condition systems was more expensive.

Imperial option list, 1967.

The package as it appeared in showrooms was actually modest compared with the “Mobile Executive” car the corporation sent around the show circuit in 1966.  That Imperial had been fitted with a telephone, Dictaphone, writing table, typewriter, television, fax machine, reading lamp and stereophonic sound system.  The 1966 show car was also a Crown Coupe but it was much more ambitious, anticipating advances in mobile communications which would unfold over the next quarter century.  At the time, car phones were available (the first service in the US offered during the late 1940s) although they were expensive and the nature of the bandwidth used and the lack of data compression meant that the range was limited as was capacity, only several dozen calls able simultaneously to be sustained.  In 1966, there was even the novelty of a Datafax, able to send or receive a US Letter-sized (slightly smaller than A4) page of text in six minutes.  That sounds unimpressive in 2023 (or compared even with the 14.4 kbit/s for Group 3 FaxStream services of the 1990s) but the appropriate comparison is with the contemporary alternatives (driving, walking or using the US Mail) and six minutes would have been a considerable advance.  As it was, the tempting equipment awaited improvements in infrastructure such as the analogue networks of the 1980s and later cellular roll-outs and these technologies contributed to the extent of use which delivered the economies of scale which eventually would make possible smart phones.

The 1966 car which toured the show circuit demonstrated the concept which, in simplified form, would the next year appear on the option list but things like telephones and fax machines anticipated the future by many years (although fax machines in cars (Audi one of a handful to offer them) never became a thing).  The Dictaphone did however make the list as one of Chrysler's regular production options (RPO) in the early 1970s and the take-up rate was surprisingly high although the fad quickly passed, dealers reporting the customers saying they worked well but they "never used them".

Pellucid

Pellucid (pronounced puh-loo-sid)

(1) Allowing the maximum passage of light, as glass; transparent; translucent; non-opaque.

(2) Clear; limpid.

(3) In fashion, a see through fabric or a garment made of such (used loosely also of many which are semi-opaque and thus technically subpellucid).

(4) Easily recognized or seen through; apparent, obvious (archaic).

(5) By extension, of music or some other sound: not discordant or harsh; clear and pure-sounding (technical use only in composition, academic study or criticism).

(6) Figuratively, clear in meaning, expression, or style; not obscure.

(7) Figuratively, of a person, able to think and understand clearly; not confused, perspicacious (now rare).

(8) In anatomy, as "zona pellucida" (the plural: zonae pellucidae or zonæ pellucidæ), a glycoprotein membrane surrounding the plasma membrane of an oocyte.

1610-1620: A learned borrowing from the Latin pellūcidus, a variant of perlūcidus (transparent, pellucid; very bright, radiant; very understandable), from perlūcēre (to shine through), the construct being per- (as a prefix, “through; throughout; completely, thoroughly”), from the primitive Indo-European root per- (forward, hence “through”) + lūcēre or lūcidus (clear; full of light, bright, shining (and figuratively “easily understood, clear, lucid”)), from lūceō (to shine; to become visible, show through (and figuratively “to be apparent, conspicuous, or evident”)).  The construct of the Latin lucidus was understood as lux (light), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European lewk- (bright; to see; to shine) + -idus (the suffix forming adjectives conveying the sense “tending towards”).  The construct in English may thus be understood as pe(r) +-l- + lucid (see through).  The (now rare) noun was derived from the adjective.  In technical use, the preferred word to convey the idea of “somewhat pellucid; tending toward pellucidness” appears to be subpellucid (along with the derived subpellucidly & subpellucidness, all sometimes hyphenated) rather than semi-pellucid, quasi-pellucid, or other possibilities.  The comparative is “more pellucid” and the superlative “most pellucid”).  Pellucid is a noun & adjective, pellucidness & pellucidity are nouns and pellucidly is an adverb; the noun plural is pellucids.  Pellucid and its derivatives are good words and should be used, just not by lawyers.

The pellucid water of Flathead Lake, Montana USA.

“These wells were filled with water, and with a blue light, celestial in its loveliness,—a light ethereal and pellucid.” (Over the Rocky Mountains to Alaska (1914) by Charles Warren Stoddard (1843-1909)).  In literary and poetic use, one will sometimes find “pellucid waters” but the word seem too obscure for advertizing copy-writers who, seeking pellucidity, prefer “crystal clear” although the once uncommon “azure” seems to have become sufficient familiar for the bays of the Mediterranean or Caribbean to be called “azure blue waters”.

Lindsay Lohan in swimsuit with subpellucid V-cut panel; clutch purse by Chanel and wearing Lanvin Classic Garnet ballet flats, Los Angeles, August 2012.

Although there are a few which are designed to be eye-catching, the extensive use the industry makes of pellucid (see-through) fabrics mostly is barely noticed because typically the application is either (1) only subpellucid, (2) covering non-sexualized body-parts such as arms or (3) as an overlay designed to highlight or subtly alter the color or texture of the fabric with which what lies beneath is made.  One intriguing tradition exploiting a fabric’s quality of pellucidly which has endured despite the unpromising origin is the bride’s wedding veil.  Historically, the idea of the veil was to conceal the bride’s appearance from the groom until the priest had pronounced the couple man & wife, thereby having joined together in the name of God what “let no man tear asunder”.  The functional advantage was as a precaution against a groom finding grounds for rejecting his betrothed in those once not uncommon cases where the ceremony was the first time the two had met, the arrangements having been hammered out by the often distant families, sometimes years in advance.  The point at which the bride was unveiled and the priest spoke the words: “You may now kiss the bride” which, in the cases of arranged marriages, actually meant: “You’re stuck with her mate; good luck.”  Even in times gone by however, most brides and grooms were well known to each other (“known” sometimes in the Biblical sense, thus the need for sometimes hastily arranged marriages) but the veil became a popular part of a bride’s ensemble and still they’re sometimes used.

In most parts of the English-speaking world, in recent decades there have been attempts to ensue “plain English” is used in legislation and legal documents.  It’s an admirable goal for many reasons but perhaps the most obvious is a contribution to increased compliance with laws, simply because pellucidness in wording would decrease the risk of unintentional breaches of law and legal obligations, at least some of which are the consequences of misunderstanding; as an example, a word like pellucid should not appear in legal documents because it is little-known and rare.  Using sentences plain in meaning and unambiguous even to those without legal training improves communication which increases information, thereby reducing the need for interpreters (lawyers), thereby decreasing the costs associated with the administration and application of legislation and other legal documents.  Those fond of conspiracy theories like to find in the difficult language a sort of job-creation programme for lawyers but it was really a product of the power of precedent, the phrases and terms of law, many still in their original Latin, having gained a certainty of meaning and thus maintained for generation after generation.  Language itself also had some inertia, the idea of a “legal style” of writing soon entrenched as “correct” and maintained by law schools and practitioners.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in Court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

The matter for a long had attracted the interest of reformers in the law and parliaments but began to coalesce as a movement in the post-war years and this may at least have been influenced by the extent to which the increasing volume of laws passed by modern states were starting to intrude on the lives of more citizens, most of whom historically had little direct contact with legislation unless they came to the attention of the police.  In 1950, when sitting as a Lord of Appeal, the English judge Lord Radcliffe (1899–1977) observed what as early as 1913 had come to be called “legalese” had become: “…a sort of hieratic language… by which the priests incant the commandments.  I seem to see the ordinary citizen today standing before the law like the laity in a medieval church: at the far end the lights glow, the priestly figures move to and fro, but it is in an unknown tongue that the great mysteries of right and wrong are proclaimed.”  He concluded by asking: “...what willing allegiance can a man owe to a canon of obligation which is not even conceived in such a form as to be understood?”

It was a reasonable question, even if phrased in a way many would find as arcane as the object of his Lordship’s critique it wasn’t until the 1970s that law reform commissions and others began to circulate discussion papers and proposals  The rationale was encapsulated in one fragment in the decision handed down by Lord Donaldson (1920–2005; Master of the Rolls 1982-1992) in Merkur Island Shipping Corp v Laughton [1983]1 All ER 334: “The efficacy and maintenance of the rule of law, which is the foundation of any parliamentary democracy, has at least two prerequisites.  First people must understand that it is in their interests, as well as in that of the community as a whole, that they should live their lives in accordance with the rules and all the rules.  Second they must know what those rules are.”  In the 1990s, reform of language began to happen at scale and there was in this an element of technological determinism, the digitization of legislation and codes meaning texts ancient and modern began to appear on the screens of word processors, making modernization a simpler process.

Afforce

Afforce (pronounced af-fors)

(1) To strengthen or reinforce by the addition of other or of specially skilled members, deliberative bodies such as juries or tribunals.

(2) To force; compel; violate (obsolete).

(3) Reflexively, to exert one's self; endeavour; attempt (obsolete).

1400s: From the Middle English (in the sense “to force”), from the Old French aforcer, from the Latin exfortiāre, from fortis (strong), from the Proto-Italic forktis, from the primitive Indo-European baergh (to rise, high, hill).  The a- prefix as used here is rare and is in English no longer productive.  It was related to the Latin ad- (to; at) and was used to show or emphasize a state, condition, or manner and was common in Old & Middle English, some of the constructs still used poetically (apace, afire, aboil, a-bling) and some where the specific, technical meaning has endured (asunder, astern).  The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) noted the descent of many of these form to the archaic, suggesting it was part of the organic evolution of the language, these “…prefixes were at length confusedly lumped together in idea, and the resultant a- looked upon as vaguely intensive, rhetorical, euphonic or even archaic and wholly otiose.”  The double-ff is a written tribute to the spoken, afforce formed with an oral prefix; the noun counterpart of this was æf-.  Afforce, afforcing & afforced are verbs, afforcement is a noun; the noun plural is afforcements.

Afforce thus emerged just as a way of emphasizing the notion of force or indicating the act transpiring.  Geoffrey Chaucer (circa 1343-1400) in The Man of Law's Tale (1387), the fifth of the Canterbury Tales uses afforce in that sense:  “Than whan thys wycked Thelous by harde manasses and hys grete strengh the had wyll to afforce her, than she restreynyd hys gret foly by thys reason, ffor cause that her Chylde Moryce the whyche was of the age of.”

That strict arbiter of English use, Sir Ernest Gowers (1880-1966), noted approvingly in his second edition (1965) of Henry Fowler's (1858–1933) Modern English Usage (1926) that the OED as early as 1888 ruled afforce was for all purposes obsolete save "to reinforce or strengthen a deliberative body by the addition of new members, as a jury by skilled assessors or persons acquainted with the facts".  Sir Ernest seemed also pleased the OED had sought to drive a stake through afforce's linguistic heart by not including an entry in the concise (COD) edition of the OED, adding that he regarded any revival as but a flashy "pride of knowledge", a most "un-amiable characteristic", the display of which "sedulously should be avoided".  Sir Ernest had spoken, Henry Fowler would have concurred and in any sense afforce remains vanishingly rare.

Manchester Assize Courts 1934.  Damaged by Luftwaffe raids in 1940-1941, it was demolished in 1957.  Perhaps surprisingly, given some of the ghastly stuff built in post-war years, the replacement Crown Court building has some nice touches and not unpleasing lines.

It was the operation of jury trials in English law which saw the meaning beginning to shift although the legal use did encapsulate both senses.  At common law, the practice to “afforce the assize” was a method for a court to secure a verdict where the jury disagreed.  This was achieved by adding other jurors to the panel until twelve could be found who were unanimous in their opinion, thus the senses (1) afforcement being forcing a jury to verdict and (2) afforcement being the addition of members to the jury.  The word has endured (if rarely used) in this technical sense and not become merely a synonym of augment, somewhat unusual in English where words tend to be co-opted for just about use which seems to fit and it may be that when courts ceased to afforce, juries, the word became stranded in its special, historic sense, a process probably assisted by the practice of adding the a- prefix faded.

Vested with both civil and criminal jurisdiction, the Courts of Assize sat between 1293-1972 in the counties of England and Wales.  The afforcement of the assize was an ancient practice in trials by jury and involved adding other jurors to the panel in cases where the jurors differed among themselves and couldn’t agree in one (sententiam) finding.  In those instances, at the discretion of the judges, either the jury could be afforced or the existing body could be compelled to unanimity by directing the sheriff to lock them up without food or drink until they did agree.  The latter does sound an extreme measure; even when medieval conclaves of cardinals proved unable to organise the numbers to elect a new pope, when their eminences were locked-up, they were at least given bread and water.

However it was done, afforcement or starvation, the objective was to get to the point where there were twelve who could agree on a verdict.  However, as legal theorists at the time observed, this really created a second trial and eventually afforcement was abandoned, both justice and its administration thought better served by an insistence on unanimity (probably an inheritance from canon law and a common thing on the continent where the unanimity of a consultative or deliberative body was deemed indispensable).  Also refined was the practice of confining jurors without meat and drink; now they’re fed and watered and, if after long enough some prove still recalcitrant, the jury is discharged and a new trial may be ordered.  Some jurisdictions have found this too inefficient and have introduced majority verdicts so only ten or eleven of the twelve need to be convinced a defendant is guilty as sin which, as any prosecutor will tell you, they all are. 

Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes (1862–1948; Chief Justice of the US 1930-1941) taking FDR's oath of office at the start of his second term, 20 January 1937.

There have too been attempts to afforce the bench.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945; US President 1933-1945), not best pleased at repeatedly having parts of his New Deal legislation declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, in 1937 created the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill which sought to add sympathetic judges to the bench, his argument being the constitution not mandating than there must be nine judges on the bench, it was a matter for congress to determine the number.  He was apparently serious but may also have had in mind the threat in 1911 by the UK’s Liberal Party government to appoint to the House of Lords as many peers as would be necessary to ensure the upper house could no longer block their legislation.  That worked, the peers backing down and allowing the government’s reforms to pass into law, the feeling always that they were less appalled by creeping socialism than the thought of the House of Lords being flooded with “jumped-up grocers”.  It may also have worked in the US, the "court-packing plan" ultimately not required.  Some months after FDR’s landslide victory in the 1936 presidential election, Justice Owen Roberts (1875–1955; US Supreme Court judge 1930-1945) switched his vote, creating a pro-New Deal majority, an act remembered in judicial history as the "the switch in time that saved nine".

The US Supreme Court in session, 1932.  The photo is by Erich Salomon (1886-1944) and is one of two known images of the court in session.  Dr Salomon died in Auschwitz.

The idea of “packing the court” has been revived before but in 2021, congressional Democrats introduced a bill for an act which would expand the Supreme Court bench from nine to thirteen, essentially for the same reasons which attracted FDR in 1937.  Unlike then however, the Democrat control of both houses was marginal and there was no chance of success and even had there been an unexpectedly good result in the 2022 mid-term elections, nothing would have overcome the resistance of conservative Democrats in the senate.  With the Republican-appointed judges (reactionary medievalists or black-letter law judges depending on one’s view) likely to be in place for decades, the 2021 bill is more a shot across the judicial bow and the interplay between electoral outcomes and public opinion, of which the judges are well aware, will bubble and perhaps boil in the years ahead.

Lindsay Lohan on the panel of The Masked Singer (2019).

The Masked Singer Australia is a TV singing competition, the local franchise of a format which began in South Korea as the King of Mask Singer.  The premise is that elaborately costumed masked celebrities sing a song and a panel has to guess their identity.  In 2019, the producers afforced the judging panel with the appointment of Lindsay Lohan and the experiment seems to have been a success despite Ms Lohan having little or no idea who the local celebrities were, masked or otherwise.  That may have been part of the charm of her performance and it seemed to gel with viewers, the second series in 2020, in which Ms Lohan wasn’t able to participate because of COVID-19 quarantine restrictions, seeing a sharp decline in viewer numbers, the opening episode down 37% from 1.2 million to 733k.  Overall, the season average in the five mainland capital cities dropped to 816k from 928k, a year-on-year drop of 12%.  In October 2021, Warner Brothers TV announced a third series had been commissioned for broadcast in 2022 but Lindsay Lohan didn't again afforce the panel, depriving audiences of the chance to watch her try to guess the names of people she's never heard of.  #BringBackLindsay is expected to trend.

Antidisestablishmentarianism

Antidisestablishmentarianism (pronounced an-tee-dis-uh-stab-lish-muhn-tair-ee-uh-niz-uhm)

Opposition to the withdrawal of state support or recognition from an established (state) church.  It was used especially in nineteenth century England by those opposed to separating the Church of England (Anglican) from the civil government.

1838: A compound word: anti + dis + establishment + arian + ism.  Anti- was from the Middle English from the Latin from the Ancient Greek.  It was a prefixal use of antí; akin to the Sanskrit ánti (opposite), the Latin ante and the Middle Dutch ende.  Dis- was a Latin prefix used to impart the meanings “apart,” “asunder,” “away,” “utterly,” or having a privative, negative, or reversing force.  In English, it’s long been used freely, especially with these latter senses, as an English formative.  Establishment was from the Old French establissement (and persists in Modern French as établissement), from the verb establir from the Old Occitan establir, from Latin stabilīre (present active infinitive of stabiliō); cognates included the Occitan establir, the French établir and the Italian stabilire.  The –arian suffix dates from circa 1530 and was from the Late Latin ariānus.  It was a suffix forming personal nouns corresponding to Latin adjectives ending in -ārius or English adjectives or nouns ending in –ary and subsequently proved productive in English with other Latinate stems, forming nouns denoting a person who supports, advocates, or practices a doctrine, theory, or set of principles associated with the base word (authoritarian, vegetarian etc).  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek –ismos & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, often through the Latin –ismus & -isma, though sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Greek.  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form action nouns from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).  The antonym (obviously) is disestablishmentarianism.  Antidisestablishmentarianism & antidisestablishmentarianist are nouns, antidisestablishmentarianistic is an adjective and antidisestablishmentarian is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is antidisestablishmentarianisms.

Portrait of King Henry VIII (circa 1509), oil on canvas by an unknown artist, Denver Art Museum.  This is the earliest portrait of Henry (as king) known to have survived.

It was Henry VIII (1491–1547; King of England (and Ireland after 1541) 1509-1547) who created what endures in England to this day as the established church, the phrase “Church of England” becoming frequently used immediately after the act of separation in 1534.  The king separated the English church from the authority of Rome to become one of a number created in the wake of the Protestant Reformation, not because of any theological or doctrinal differences, but in order to secure the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon (1485-1536).  Having found the Clement VII (Giulio di Giuliano de' Medici, 1478–1534; pope 1523-1534) unwilling to annul, he had himself instead declared supreme head of the Church in England, the schism with Rome (with the exception of a brief interruption), unhealed to this day.  Problem solved.  There is a distinction between the Church in England and the Church of England, the roots of Christianity in the British Isles established during England’s time as a province of the Roman Empire early in the first millennium.  From these beginnings there were forks and regional divergences until 597 when a Gregorian mission by Augustine of Canterbury visited, Christianity in England from that point subject to the authority of the Pope.  So it continued until 1534, England even once providing a pope (Adrian IV, circa 1100- 1159, pope 1154-1159), noted now for his contribution to the Irish problem, something unsolved even now.

Generally pointless and the Germans do it better

Romanus Pontifex non concedit. Tomb of Clement VII, carved in marble by Nanni di Baccio Bigio (pseudonym of Giovanni Lippi (circa 1508-1568), Santa Maria Sopra, Minerva.  Had the times been different, Clement may have been inclined towards pragmatism and found some loophole permitting an annulment but given the geopolitics, he was constrained.

With 28 letters and twelve syllables, antidisestablishmentarianism is often cited as the longest word in English.  However, floccinaucinihilipilification (a waggish schoolboy pseudo-Latin creation meaning “the act or habit of describing or regarding something as worthless” (the construct being floccus (a wisp) +‎ naucum (a trifle) +‎ nihilum (nothing) +‎ pilus (a hair) + -fication (process of becoming)) is one letter longer and the longest non-technical word in English (there is the 29-letter plural form "antidisestablishmentarianisms" which ties with floccinaucinihilipilification and the 30-letter "antidisestablishmentarianistic" but such derived forms are dismissed by the editors of dictionaries as artificial concoctions).  It was once used in a debate in the UK's House of Commons, although, even that wasn’t the longest ever spoken in Westminster, pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis (a factitious creation said to mean “a lung disease caused by inhalation of very fine silica dust usually found in volcanos”) having been earlier used during a select committee enquiry.  An opportunist extension of the medical term pneumonoconiosis, it was coined during the proceedings of the National Puzzlers' League convention (a natural home of English eccentricity) in 1935 in an attempt to create English’s longest word but was dismissed by dictionaries as fake, clinicians and textbooks still referring to the disease as pneumonoconiosis, pneumoconiosis, or silicosis.  British dictionaries may feel compelled to include antidisestablishmentarianism but many overseas publications do not, on the basis there’s hardly any record of its use except in lists of long words which some editors treat as lexicographical freak shows.  Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary lists the longest as "electroencephalographically", a physician’s diagnostic tool.

English doesn't encourage the conjuring of the long compound words familiar in German.  The classic long German word is Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän (42 letters) meaning "Danube steamship company captain" but there are others, not all of which dictionaries accept.  Betäubungsmittelverschreibungsverordnung (41 letters) means "regulation requiring a prescription for an anaesthetic”; Bezirksschornsteinfegermeister (30 letters) means “head district chimney sweep"; Rechtsschutzversicherungsgesellschaften (39 letters) means "legal protection insurance companies".  Enterprising Germans created Donaudampfschifffahrtselektrizitätenhauptbetriebswerkbauunterbeamtengesellschaft (80 letters) meaning "association of subordinate officials of the head office management of the Danube steamboat electrical services" but this was judged bogus bogus and rejected the authorities which held the 63-letter Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz ("beef labelling regulation and delegation of supervision law") to be the longest.  It was a real word in actual (if rare) use though usually through the more manageable abbreviation ReÜAÜG but it was rendered obsolete by changes to EU regulations.  Currently, the longest word accepted by most German dictionaries is the 36 letter Kraftfahrzeughaftpflichtversicherung (automobile liability insurance).

Google ngram (a quantitative and not qualitative measure): 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.  In the matter of antidisestablishmentarianism, the spike in late twentieth century "use" represents the effect of the internet encouraging the creation of many lists and on-line replications of printed material thus the apparent paradox of the appearance of frequent use which actually reflected the existence of many sources explaining why the anyway rare word had become otherwise functionally extinct.

Regarding the substantive matter of disestablishment, it’s a political position developed in nineteenth century Britain in opposition to the Liberal Party’s proposal for the removal of the Anglicans’ status as the state church of England, Ireland, and Wales.  The establishment was maintained in England, but the Church of Ireland was disestablished in 1871 and the four Church of England dioceses in Wales were disestablished in 1920, becoming the Church in Wales.  Given the nature (and relevance) of the modern Church of England, it’s a matter seldom mentioned as a constitutional reform of pressing importance.