Bilateral

Bilateral (pronounced bahy-lat-er-uhl)

(1) Pertaining to, involving, or affecting two or both sides, factions, parties, or the like.

(2) Located on opposite sides of an axis; two-sided, especially when of equal size, value etc.

(3) In anatomy and biology, pertaining to the right and left sides of a structure (especially in the region furthest from the median plane).

(4) In contract law, binding the parties to reciprocal obligations.

(5) In anthropology, relating to descent through both maternal and paternal lineage.

(6) In the British education system, a course combining academic and technical components.

(7) In physics, acting or placed at right angles to a line of motion or strain.

(8) In phonetics and phonology, of a consonant (especially the English clear l), pertaining to sounds generated by partially blocking the egress of the airstream with the tip of the tongue touching the alveolar ridge, leaving space on one or both sides of the occlusion for air passage.

1775: The construct is bi + lateral.  Bi-, in the sense of the word-forming element (two, having two, twice, double, doubly, twofold, once every two etc) is from the from Latin bis (twice) or bīnus (double), from the Old Latin which was cognate with the Sanskrit dvi-, the Ancient Greek di- & dis-, the Old English twi- and the German zwei- (twice, double), all from the primitive Indo-European PIE root dwo- (two), ultimate source also of the Modern English duo.  Bilateral is a noun & adjective, bilateralist, bilateralization, bilaterality & bilateralism are nouns and bilaterally is an adverb; the noun plural is bilaterals.

It may have been in use before but was certainly nativized during the sixteenth century.  The occasionally bin- before vowels was a form which originated in French, not Latin although it’s suggested this may have been influenced by the Latin bini (twofold), the familiar example being “binary”.  In computing, it’s most associated with zero-one distinction in the sense of off-on and in chemistry, it denotes two parts or equivalents of the substance referred to although there are rules and conventions of use to avoid confusion with stuff named using the Greek prefix di- such as carbon dioxide (CO₂).  In general use, words built with bi- prefix can cause confusion.  While biennial (every two years) seems well understood, other constructs probably due to rarity remain, ambiguous: fortnightly is preferable to biweekly and using “every two months” or “twice a month” as required removes all doubt.

Lateral was first adopted as verb in the 1640s from the fourteenth century Old French lateral, directly from Latin laterālis (belonging to the side), a derivation of latus (genitive lateris) (the side, flank of humans or animals, lateral surface) of uncertain origin.  As a noun, the precise definition "situated on either side of the median vertical longitudinal plane of the body" is from 1722.   Equilateral (all sides equal) was first used in mathematics in the 1560s, a borrowing from the Latin aequilateralis, aequi- being the suffix- meaning “equal”; contra-lateral (occurring on the opposite side) is from 1871; the adjective ipsilateral (on the same side of the body), bolting on the Latin ipse- suffix (self) dates from 1907; the use in US football to describe a lateral pass seems to have appeared in print first in 1934.  Multilateral and trilateral seem to have been seventeenth century inventions from geometry, the more familiar modern applications in international diplomacy not noted until 1802.

Conventions of use

Although one would have to be imaginative, with the Latin, there’s little limit to the compound words one could construct to describe the number of sides of a thing.  The words, being as unique as whole numbers, would also be infinite.  Whether many would be linguistically useful is doubtful; sextilateral may mislead and ūndēquadrāgintālateral (thirty nine sided) seems a complicated solution to a simple problem.

Unilateral             One-sided
Bilateral               Two-sided
Trilateral              Three-sided
Quadrilateral        Four-sided
Quintilateral         Five-sided
Sextilateral          Six-sided
Septilateral          Seven-sided
Octolateral           Eight-sided
Novilateral           Nine-sided
Decilateral           Ten-sided
Centilateral          Hundred-sided
Millelateral           Thousand-sided

The modern convention appears to be to stop at trilateral and thereafter, when describing gatherings of four or more, adopt multilateral or phrases like four-power or six-party.  Trilateral seem still manageable, adopted not only by governmental entities but also by the Trilateral Commission (founded in 1973 with members from Japan, the US, and Europe), a remarkably indiscrete right-wing think-tank.  However, in the organically pragmatic evolution of English, there it tends to stop, quadrilateral now most associated with Euclidean plane geometry (there are seven quadrilateral polygons) and used almost exclusively in that discipline and other strains of mathematics.  Outside of mathematics, it was only in the formal language of diplomacy that quadrilateral was used with any frequency.  The agreement of 15 July 1840, (negotiated between Lord Palmerston (1784-1865; variously UK prime-minister or foreign secretary on several occasions 1830-1865) and Nicholas I (1796–1855; Tsar of Russia 1825-1855) to tidy up things in the Mediterranean) between Great Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia was formalised as a quadrilateral treaty but the word fell from favour with quadruple alliance preferred for a later European arrangement.

Bilateral diplomacy: Lindsay Lohan meeting with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (b 1954; prime-minister or president of the Republic of Türkiye since 2003), Ankara, 27 January 2017.

Although many of the wonks in the foreign policy establishment like to dream of a world in which everything is settled by multi-lateral discussions, in the world of the realists, it's understood the core of conflicts (which are the central dynamic of international relations) are bilateral.  Accordingly, most efforts are devoted to bilateral discussions.  In the business of predictions, it's also the relationships between two states which absorbs most of the thoughts of pundits and the long-term projections of those in the field can make interesting reading, decades later.  In 1988, Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) published 1999: Victory Without War, which with no false modesty he suggested was "...a how-to guide in foreign police for whomever was elected president in November 1988".  Given that, it's not surprising one passage has attracted recent comment: "...in the twenty-first century the Sino-US relationship will be one of the most important, and one of the most mutually beneficial, bilateral relationships in the world."  Things do appear to have worked out differently but there is a school of thought that the leadership of Xi Jinping (b 1953; general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and paramount leader of the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 2013) is an aberration and that his replacement is likely to be one who pursues a more cooperative foreign and economic policy because that is more likely to be in China's long-term (ie a century ahead) interest.

A quadrilateral meeting to discuss German war guilt reparations and allied debts accumulated during World War I (1914-1918): Raymond Poincaré (1860–1934; President of France 1913-1920, left), Andrew Bonar Law (1858–1923; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom 1922-1923. centre-left), Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943, centre right) and Georges Theunis (1873–1966; Prime Minister of Belgium 1921-1925 & 1934-1935, right), 10 Downing Street, London, December 1922.

This was an obscure photograph which until the twenty-first century had appeared only in some specialist history texts but as the internet achieved critical mass memes became a thing and Mussolini’s sanpaku eyes were a gift for the meme-makers, most captions suggesting the duce may have had a sudden premonition of his own unfortunate end although others offered: “I feel naked without a moustache”, “I think I have imposter syndrome”, “Oh God, I just pooped my pants”, “One of these men may be a Freemason but I don't know which” and “I wonder if they can tell I'm on drugs”.  However, although not noted as a mystic, he may also have sensed impending death “sitteth at the right hand”, Andrew Bonar Law then having only months to live.

Serving as the UK prime minister for seven months between October 1922 and May 1923, it’s ironic Andrew Bonar Law is now remembered only because of the memorable title of his biography (The Unknown Prime Minister. The Life and Times of Andrew Bonar Law, 1858–1923 (1955)) by Tory historian Robert Norman (Baron Blake, 1916–2003), something borrowed from a chance remark at Law’s funeral by Henry Asquith (1852–1928; UK prime minister 1908-1916): “We’re burying the unknown prime minister next to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.”  Law deserves more than that footnote because that he even achieved the office was emblematic of both a changing country and a changing party.  He was preferred over Lord Curzon (1859–1925), a glittering former foreign secretary and Viceroy of India; never again would seriously it be contemplated a prime-minister might sit in the House of Lords.  Unexpectedly diagnosed with an inoperable throat cancer, Law resigned and within six months was dead.      

Rare too is the more recent diplomatic creation, the pentalateral (five-power) treaty of which there appear to have been but two.  One was signed on 23 December 1950 between the United States, France, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam.  It didn’t end well.  The other pentalateral treaty was sealed in Tehran during October 2007 between Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan, the littoral countries of the Caspian Sea and was a mechanism to avoid squabbles while carving up resources.  Some assemblies are better described in other ways.  When the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the UK & the US) plus Germany formed a now defunct standing committee to deal with issues raised by Iran’s nuclear programme, although a sextilateral, it was instead dubbed P5+1 although in Brussels, the eurocrats preferred E3+3.

The chief negotiators of the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, left to right: Sergey Razov (b 1953; Russia), Christopher Hill (b 1952; United States), Kenichirō Sasae (b 1951; Japan), Wu Dawei (b 1946; China), (Chun Yung-woo, b 1952; South Korea), Kim Kye-gwan (b 1943; North Korea).  Those learning English will find the conventional tool of surface analysis produces a misleading meaning if they deconstruct the elements of "sextilateral".  Here, a spokesman for six men briefs the media about their sextilateral, Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, Beijing, China, 23 December 2006.

Concordat

Concordat (pronounced kon-kawr-dat)

(1) An agreement or compact, especially an official one Agreement between things; mutual fitness; harmony.

(2) A formal agreement between two parties, especially between a church and a state.

(3) In Roman Catholic canon law, a pact, treaty or agreement between the Holy See and a secular government regarding the regulation of church matters.  In early use it was sometimes a personal agreement between pope and sovereign.

1610–1620: From the the sixteenth century French conciordat, replacing concordate from the Medieval Latin concordātum (something agreed), a noun use of the Latin concordatum, neuter of concordātus, past participle of concordāre (to be in agreement; to be of one mind), from concors (genitive concordis) (of one mind)  from concors (genitive concordis) (of one mind).  The original definition in Roman Catholic canon law was "an agreement between Church and state on a mutual matter".  Concordat is a noun, the noun plural is concordats and concordatory is an adjective.  Concord dates from 1250-1300, from the Middle English and Old French concorde from the Latin concordia, (harmonious), genitive concordis (of the same mind, literally “hearts together”).  Concordat is a noun and concordant an adjective; the noun plural is concordats.

The Duce, Benito Mussolini (1883–1945; Prime Minister of Italy 1922-1943, right) and Cardinal Pietro Gasparri (1852–1934; Cardinal Secretary of State 1914-1930, left) signing the Lateran Concordat in 1929.

The concordat, a formal agreement between the Holy See and a sovereign state, dates from a time when the relationship between the Church and sovereign entities was different than what now exists.  Indeed, the dynamics of the relationships have changed much over the centuries but, at any given moment, concordats have always been practical application of Church-state relations and, like all politics, were an expression of the art of the possible, a concordat not necessarily what a pope wanted, but certainly the best he could at the time manage, the best known tending to be the controversial, notably (1) the treaty of 1801 with Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821; leader of the French Republic 1799-1804 & Emperor of the French from 1804-1814 & 1815), (2) the Lateran Accord agreed in 1929 with Mussolini which created the modern city-state of the Vatican and which was the final step in Italian unification and (3) The Reich Concordat of 1933, the accommodation with Hitler’s Germany which was supposed to resolve the issue of relations which had been unsettled since Otto von Bismarck's (1815-1989; Chancellor of the German Empire 1871-1890) time but which Berlin repeatedly violated.

La Signature du Concordat aux Tuileries 15 juillet 1801 (The Signing of the Concordat at the Tuileries, 15 July 1801) (1803-1804) by François Pascal Simon Gérard (1770–1837) (titled as Baron Gérard in 1809); the original hangs in the Musée National des Châteaux de Versailles et de Trianon, Versailles.  

At least those violations weren’t wholly unexpected.  Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (1876–1958; Pope Pius XII 1939-1958) had been Apostolic Nuncio (ambassador; 1926-1929) to Berlin and was Cardinal Secretary of State (foreign minister; 1930–1939) when the Reich Concordat was signed and he was under no illusion.  When it was said to him that the Nazis were unlikely to honor the terms, he replied with a smile that was true but that they would probably not violate all its articles “at the same time”.  The sardonic realism would serve the cardinal well in the years ahead when often he would required to choose the lesser of many competing evils.  Some though, for a while, retained hope if not faith.  As late as 1937, Archbishop Conrad Gröber (1872–1948; Archbishop of Freiburg 1932-1948) thought the Reich Concordat proof that “…two powers, totalitarian in their character, can find agreement, if their domains are separate”.  Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945), another cynic though then still a realist, viewed the concordat much as Hermann Göring (1893-1946) would in his trial at Nuremberg describe all the treaties executed by the Nazis: “so much toilet paper”.  Actually an admirer of the Roman Catholic Church which had survived two-thousand years of European rough and tumble, he was resigned to a co-existence but one on his terms, noting the day would come when there would be a reckoning with “those black crows”.

Two of the twentieth century's great survivors, German vice chancellor Franz von Papen (1879-1969) (second from left) and the Holy See's secretary of state Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII) (head of the table) meet in the Vatican on 20 July 1933 to sign the Reischskonkordat which some six weeks later was ratified by the Nazi-dominated Reichstag (the German parliament).  The cardinal calculated the Church would gain from the arrangement but had few illusions about the Nazis.  Later, when being driven through Rome where he saw two men fighting in the street, he remarked to his companion "I imagine they've probably just signed a concordat".

That’s not to say there haven’t always been theorists who wandered a bit beyond the possible.  After the Reformation, there were those in the Church who held that the Church sits above the state in all things (the “regalist” position), while others (maintaining the “curialist” position) held that although the Church is superior to the state, the Church may grant certain privileges to the state through agreements such as concordats.  In the modern age, the accepted understanding of concordats is that the Church and the various sovereign states are both legal entities able to enter into bilateral agreements.  Concordats are thus no different than other treaties & agreements in that being executed under international law, they are enforceable according to legal principles.  Church and state may in some ways not be co-equal but canon law does recognise the two exist in distinct spheres and is explicit in respecting the bilateral agreements that the Holy See has entered into with other nation-states.  The Code of Canon Law states unambiguously that concordats override any contrary norms in canon law: “The canons of the Code neither abrogate nor derogate from the agreements entered into by the Apostolic See with nations or other political societies. These agreements therefore continue in force exactly as at present, notwithstanding contrary prescripts of this Code.”  This is an unexceptional statement familiar in many constitutional arrangements where two legal systems interact, the need being to define, where conflict may exist, which has precedence and is no more than an application of a legal maxim known to both canon and secular law: pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be honored).  Concordats can both protect and clarify the rights of the Church by precisely defining relationship between the Church and a state, expressed by the Second Vatican Council’s (Vatican II 1962-1965) pastoral constitution on the Church in the modern world, Gaudium et spes (Joay and Hope) in the statement:

“The Church herself makes use of temporal things insofar as her own mission requires it.  She, for her part, does not place her trust in the privileges offered by civil authority.  She will even give up the exercise of certain rights which have been legitimately acquired, if it becomes clear that their use will cast doubt on the sincerity of her witness or that new ways of life demand new methods.”

In other words, “if you can’t beat them, join them”, or, at least, enter into peaceful co-existence with them, a position in the modern age possible, if not uncontroversial with sovereign and sub-national entities notionally with Catholic majority populations (eg Bavaria 1966, Austria 1969, Italy 1985) but also with countries where Christians exist only as tiny minorities (eg Tunisia 1964, Morocco 1985, Israel 1993).  Nor does a concordat need to be a complete codification, the agreement between the Holy See and Tel Aviv noting that in certain matters, agreement had not been reached and discussions need to continue.  Such “framework” or “stepping-stone” agreements have been in the diplomatic toolkit for centuries but they’re a statement of professed intent and in the decades since there’s been little apparent progress in many of the unresolved matters important to the Holy See regarding physical property in the Holy Land and the “working document” was never ratified by the Israeli parliament (the Knesset).  At least partially filling this diplomatic lacuna was something which has thus far proved a coda to the Holy See’s official recognition in 2012 of the State of Palestine.  In 2015, The Vatican concluded a concordat with “the State of Palestine” (sic), supporting a two-state solution to the conflict between Palestine and Israel “on the basis of the 1967 borders”.  According to Rome, the provisions in the agreement concern technical (ie financial & legal) aspects of the legal status of Catholic facilities and personnel on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.  That may be as boringly procedural as it sounds but what’s aroused interest is that the Vatican has refused to publish the text or comment on the details, thus arousing suspicion that the treaty between with the Palestinians might, at least in part, contradict the earlier concordat with Israel.  From Washington to Tel Aviv, many are interested in the small print.

Rome 1929: The Duce reads the Lateran Concordat's small print.

Interestingly, Vatican II struck the term concordat from canon law, apparently in a nod to the Council's declaration on religious liberty, Dignitatis humanae (Of the Dignity of the Human Person) which mused on the evolution of a “…different model of relations between the Vatican and various states [which] is still evolving.”  Whatever might have been intended to be the implications of that, it reappeared with the Polish Concordat of 1993 and seems to be here to stay.

The term concordat can be used of any arrangement by which parties achieve some sort of entente cordiale and it’s sometimes only in retrospect (which can take decades) their true from can be understood variously as a reconciliation (Paris Hilton & Lindsay Lohan), marriage of convenience (Turkey’s (now the Republic of Türkiye) membership of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Alliance) or a cynical expediency (the Ribbentrop-Molotov (Nazi-Soviet) Pact (1939)).

Cabotage

Cabotage (pronounced kab-uh-tij or kab-uh-tahzh)

(1) In seafaring, navigation or trade along the coast.

(2) In aviation, the legal restriction to domestic carriers of air transport between points within a country's borders (with certain exceptions).

(3) The transport of goods or passengers between two points in the same country; the exclusive right of a country to control such transport.

(4) In law, the right to engage in such transport.

1825–1835: A borrowing from the French cabotage (coasting trade) from the French caboter (to sail coastwise; to travel by the coast), a verbal derivative of the Middle French cabo & the Spanish cabo (headland; cape).  Ultimate root is the Latin caput (head).  Word was first used in sixteenth century France to reference the restrictions which permitted only French ships to trade or transport between French ports. Other countries adopted the concept, later extending it to land and air travel.  Cabotage is a noun; the noun plural is cabotages.

Rights

Example of a cabotage arrangement.

Originally a term applied exclusively to shipping along coastal routes, cabotage can now refer also to aviation and land transport.  It is the transport of passengers and/or goods between two places in one country, undertaken by vessels from a different country.  Cabotage rights are those which define the extent to which transport operators from one country can trade in another and many arrangements exist.  In aviation, it is the right to operate within the domestic borders of another country; most states don’t permit aviation cabotage, and strict sanctions exist, historically either for reasons of economic protectionism, national security, or public safety.  One exception is the European Union, the member states of which grant cross-vested rights to all others, cabotage rights remaining otherwise rare in passenger aviation.  The Chicago Convention on Civil Aviation prohibits member states from granting cabotage on an exclusive basis, which has meant it’s not been used in bilateral aviation negotiations and is not granted under most open skies agreements.  The Closer Economic Relations agreement between Australia and New Zealand permits Australian carriers to fly domestically and internationally from New Zealand and vice versa. Additionally, there are limited rights for the airlines to service domestic routes within both countries.

Gynandromorph

Gynandromorph (pronounced ji-nan-druh-mawrf, gahy-nan-druh-mawrf or jahy-nan-druh-mawrf)

(1) In biology, an organism exhibiting both male and female morphological characteristics.

(2) An insect, crustacean or bird literally having physical characteristics of both sexes, usually displaying a bilateral difference.

(3) A person having certain physical characteristics of both sexes (use now rare).

1895–1900: The construct was the Ancient Greek gýnandro(s) (gynandrous) + -morph.  It deconstructs as gyn- (from the Ancient Greek gynē (γυνή) (woman; female organism) + -andro- (from the Ancient Greek ἀνήρ & ἀνδρός (anēr & andros) (man; male organism) + -morph (from the Ancient Greek μορφή (morphē) (form; shape).  The word cab thus be understood as “female-male form”, an individual organism with a mix of both male and female physical traits, such exhibit such characteristics due typically to genetic or developmental anomalies.  Gynandromorph, gynandromorphism & gynandromorphy are nouns and gynandrous, gynandromorphic & gynandromorphous are adjectives; the noun plural is gynandromorphs.

In biological science, the terms cosexual, dichogamic and gynandromorph are all to describe states where the binaries “male” and “female” in some way co-exist and each is a distinct phenomenon: (1) Cosexual refers to organisms which simultaneously possess and can function as both male and female.  The state is best known in botany (hermaphroditic plants) but there are also such animals, the common earthworm a cosexual as they have both male and female reproductive organs and can mate with any other earthworm.  (2) A dichogamic is an organism which at different points in its life-cycle have male and female reproductive functions at different times in their lifecycle.  Dichogamy ensures self-fertilization is minimized and biologists distinguish between protandry (male phase precedes the female phase (best documented in the ways of the clownfish)) and protogyny (female phase precedes the male phase (noted in some wrasses).  (3) In zoology (prevalent particularly in entomology), a gynandromorph is an organism (insect, crustacean, bird etc) with both male and female physical characteristics, typically split across the body (ie one side male, one female), manifesting often in a distinctive and often dramatic “two-tone” body of different color left & right.  Although visually the creatures appear in this aspect usually to be exactly (ie 50/50) symmetrical, a gynandromorph’s expression of genitalia can vary greatly between instances of the phenomenon.

In the context of humans, the noun hermaphrodite (plural hermaphrodites) used to be the accepted technical term in human physiology to describe an individual in which both male and female reproductive organs (and sometimes also all or some of the secondary sex characteristics) were present (ie a cosexual), or in which the chromosomal patterns did not fall under typical definitions of male and female.  It’s no longer in general use to describe people (although it does still appear in technical publications (medicine or pathology) and is now considered offensive, “intersex” now the preferred term).  In the past, “hermaphrodite” was used even of some military platforms (including warships and tanks) because the labels “male” & “female” had been used of certain designs so “hermaphrodite” was applied to hybrid designs which combined features from both.  The noun androgyne refers to a person who expresses a combination of male and female characteristics, often in the context of gender identity or presentation; it is used of behavior, not biology.

True bibateral gynandromorphs: A tarantula (left), lobster (centre) and cardinal (right).  The physiology of the cardinal is typical of the phenomenon, a functional ovary on its left side, one functioning testis on its right; the mechanism which created the genetic anomaly was that inside its egg were two yokes which combined to give life to one bird, half male, half female.

Let That Be Your Last Battlefield: Star Trek (1969).

While there was nothing to suggest gynandromorphism was part of the plot-line, the visual device was used in “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”, an episode in the third season (1969) of the US SF (science fiction) television show Star Trek.  The two central characters in the tale are to survivors of a war-torn planet, each half black and half white, the only difference between them being their colors were on different sides.  The script was an earnest (if unsubtle) critique of racism (then, as now, the central fault-line in US society) but, ominously (though realistically), the episode concludes with the pair still at each other’s throats.

Lindsay Lohan, SLS Hotel, Los Angeles, April 2009.

Although humans use all sorts of colors for body-detailing (lipstick, hair dyes, eye shadow etc), the “half one color, half another” motif has never been a thing.  Inadvertently though, it can be achieved.  In April 2009, photographs circulated of Lindsay Lohan in Los Angeles, attending the launch of A|X (Armani Xchange) Watches at the SLS Hotel, Beverley Hills, her strapless Balmain mini-dress much admired, the white fabric accenting her skin’s golden tan.  Next day however, a shot appeared of her from behind, suggesting the fake tan had been applied only to the front half.  It was a bit of a cheat shot because of the way the color-saturation was set but it seems, on the night, things might have looked a bit gynandromorphic.  

Refusenik

Refusenik (pronounced ri-fyooz-nik)

(1) In (originally) informal use, a citizen of the USSR (the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 1922-1991), a Soviet citizen (usually Jewish) who was denied permission to emigrate from the Soviet Union (usually to Israel).

(2) By extension, a person who refuses to cooperate with a system or comply with a law as a matter of political principle or because of a moral conviction.

Circa 1975: The construct was refuse + -nik.  The Russian отказник (otkáznik), the construct of which was отка́з (otkáz) (refusal, denial, repudiation, rejection, nonsuit; renunciation, disavowal; breakdown, failure) +‎ -ник (-nik) was a synonym of refusenik.  The -ник suffix was from the Proto-Slavic -ьnikъ, created originally by a nominalization of the adjectives in -ьnъ with the suffix -ikъ (from -ик (-ik)).  The suffix and was used to form masculine nouns, usually denoting adherents etc, the use illustrated by forms such as the dialectal Lithuanian lauk-inykas (peasant, farmer), from laũkas (field) and the Old Prussian lauk-inikis (vassal).  Refuse (in the sense of “to decline a request or demand” was from the Middle English refusen, from the Old French refuser, from the Vulgar Latin refūsāre, a blend of Classical Latin refūtāre (the source also of “refute”) and recūsāre (the source also of recuse).  The use in the sense of “items or material that have been discarded; rubbish, garbage, trash) was a late Middle English borrowing of the Middle French refusé, past participle of refuser (to refuse) which displaced the native Middle English wernen (to refuse).  In English, “refusenik” began as a calque of the Russian отка́зник (otkáznik) and from the mid-1970s, “refusenik” came to be used of someone who refused to do something (usually some law with which most complied), often either as a protest against government policy (conscription) or as a matter of personal autonomy (mandated vaccination).  While the construct of the word was an amusing novelty, the idea conveyed had a long tradition, the English agent noun refuser documented since the late fifteenth century.  The alternative spelling refusnik was not uncommon.  Refusenik is a noun; the noun plural is refuseniks.  Forms like refuseniking & refuseniked are non-standard but used for humorous effect as required.

Technically the –nik suffix corresponds approximately to the English –er in that nearly always it denotes an agent noun (ie it describes a person related to the thing, state, habit, or action described by the word to which the suffix is attached).  The –er suffix was from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought most likely to have been borrowed from the Latin –ārius where, as a suffix, it was used to form adjectives from nouns or numerals.  In English, the –er suffix, when added to a verb, created an agent noun: the person or thing that doing the action indicated by the root verb.   The use in English was reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant -our), from the Latin -ātor & -tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  When appended to a noun, it created the noun denoting an occupation or describing the person whose occupation is the noun.  The connotation however is different in that –er is linguistically neutral (ie the value in the word “murderer” is carried by the “murder” element) whereas a –nik word is usually loaded and that can be negative, positive and often jocular. 

In structural linguistics, the process of creating words by adding a foreign suffix (such as refusenik) is known as “suffix borrowing” (or “affix borrowing”, “prefix borrowing” the obvious companion term).  Refusenik was thus a fork of the phenomenon known as “neoclassical blending” or “neoclassical compounding”, where a foreign morpheme is combined with a native or other language base.  The forms are described as “neologisms created through affixation” and many are coined for jocular effect, the “-nik” subset used to imply a person associated with something, often in a somewhat negative sense, other noted examples including “beatnik” (a member of the “beat” generation of the 1950s, an early example of what would in the 1960s come to be called the “counter culture” and a kind of proto-hippie), “peacenik” (one opposed to war and coined originally to describe those associated with the anti-war movement in the US and opposed to US participation in the conflict in Indochina), “warnick” (the response of the peaceniks to those who supported US policy (which wasn’t picked up by the establishment, unlike “dry”, used originally as a slur by the those who had been labeled “wet” (higher taxes, more social spending etc); the “drys” (smaller government, deregulation etc) liked the term and adopted it although their attempt to give it a little more appeal as “warm & dry” never caught on), “appeasenik” (used in a derogatory sense to describe those who prefer a policy of appeasement to a more robust foreign policy response), “contranik”, (used in a derogatory sense to describe those in the US supporting the right-wing Contras (from the Spanish la contrarrevolución (literally “the counter-revolution”) who between 1979-1990 staged an insurgency against Nicaragua’s Marxist Sandinista Junta), “nogoodnik” (someone disreputable), “neatnick” (someone thought obsessively tidy in their habits), “kibbutznik” (In Israel, a member of a kibbutz (and not necessarily a Russian émigré)), “sweetnik” (one’s sweetheart (male or female), “noisenik” (a musician who produces harsh, discordant music (with deliberate intent rather than through lack of skill) and “nudenik” (a advocate of nude sunbathing).

The latest cohort of refusniks are certain specialist surgeons.  There are often sound medical reasons why surgeons might refuse to perform procedures, whether generally or on specific individuals but the emergence of "flat refusal" has become one of the theatres in the culture wars.  Women diagnosed with breast cancer sometimes undergo either a unilateral (or single) or bilateral (or double) mastectomy (the surgical amputation of the breast) and while many have in recent decades been able to have the cosmetic appearance of the organ(s) surgically reconstructed, others have chosen to use an external prosthesis (which sits inside a pocketed mastectomy bra) or make no attempt to emulate their pre-surgical appearance.  There is now an activist community of post-mastectomy women who style themselves as "flatties" and their movement they call "go flat"; their interest is in seeking to enforce the right of women to have surgeons follow their request to receive what they describe as an AFC (aesthetic flat closure, a surgical closure (sewing up) in which the “surplus” skin often preserved to accommodate a future reconstructive procedure is removed and the chest rendered essentially “flat”).  The movement disclosed some surgeons simply refuse to perform AFCs, some patients discovering this only after their surgical dressings were removed.  The Go Flat movement reflects both an aesthetic choice and a reaction against what is described in the US as the “medical-industrial complex”, the point being that women who have undergone a mastectomy should not be subject to pressure either to use a prosthetic or agree to surgical reconstruction (a lucrative procedure for the industry),  The medical industry has argued an AFC can preclude a satisfactory cosmetic outcome in reconstruction if a woman “changes her mind” but the movement insists it's an example of how the “informed consent” of women is not being respected.  Essentially, what the movement is arguing is the request for an AFC should be understood as an example of the legal principle of VAR (voluntary assumption of risk).

A 1961 guide to the beatnik world view.

The difference between a “beatnik and a “beat” was that the “Beats” were members of the “Beat Generation” a literary and cultural movement which emerged in the late 1940s and popularized by the writers Jack Kerouac (1922-1969), Allen Ginsberg (1926–1997), William S Burroughs (1914–1997) a Neal Cassady (1926-1968).  Kerouac would describe the Beat state as being “beaten down, exhausted, but also in touch with the raw, spiritual, and authentic experiences of life” and they were a harbinger of the counter-culture of the 1960s.  There were at the time claims there was a distinct “Beat philosophy” but there were so many claims about this that it really can’t be said there was ever a coherent “philosophy” beyond a sense of rebellion against mainstream culture, materialism, and the alleged conformity on post-war America life, the latter something which in later decades would exert a strong nostalgic pull, exploited by a number of politicians.  The term “beatnik” was more about the stereotyped. Superficial elements associated with those who followed what they thought was the “beat lifestyle”.  It’s not fair to say the beatniks were “the Beat’s groupies” but that probably was the public perception, one which imagined them sitting in coffee shops, wearing berets and listening to poetry readings.

The “nik” words belong to a broader class of borrowed affixed words or loanword derivatives, the best known of which are the neoclassical compounds, formed by combining elements (usually prefixes or suffixes) from classical languages, particularly Greek and Latin, with existing words or roots from other languages (or simply combining Greek & Latin elements, something of which some purists don’t approve).  These compound words are common both in general use and specialized or technical fields such as science, medicine, and philosophy.  Well known examples include: “television” (the construct being tele- (from the Greek tēle (far)) + vision (from the Latin videre (to see)), “automobile”, the construct being auto- (from the Greek autos (self)) + mobile (from the Latin mobilis (movable)), “astronaut” (the construct being astro- (from the Greek astron (star)) + -naut (from the Greek nautēs (sailor)), “bicycle”, the construct being bi- (from the Latin bis (twice)) + cycle (from the Greek kyklos (circle; wheel)).

There has never been an authenticated Lindsaygate or Lohangate so, deductively, Lindsay Lohan has lived a scandal-free life although she does have some history of refusenikism.

Refusenik though belongs to the subset of the type coined usually for humorous effect or a commercial purpose and they include the “-zillas” (stormzilla, bridezilla, bosszilla etc), the suffix from the fictional Godzilla and appended to imply something or someone is excessively large, powerful, or monstrous, usually in an exaggerated or absurd way, the “-aholics” (shopaholic, chocoholic, workaholic etc) the suffix appended to The suffix -aholic (from alcoholic) is often humorously attached to nouns to describe someone addicted to or obsessed with something, the “fests” (geekfest, nerdfest, laughfest, foodfest etc, the –fest suffix from the German Fest (festival), appended to describe and event involves much of a certain thing or theme or will attract those of a certain type, the “-o-ramas” (snack-o-rama, fright-o-rama, book-o-rama etc), the -orama suffix from panorama (a wide view) and appended to suggest an abundance or spectacle of something and of course the “-gates” (pizzagate, whitewatergate, snipergate, servergate, benghazigate etc (all in some way related to crooked Hillary Clinton which is interesting), the -gate suffix from the Watergate scandal of the early 1970s.  The use of the –gate scandal is an example of what’s called “transferred, implied or imputed meaning” and because it creates form which are “mock-serious”, the words can straddle a range of senses, unlike something like “chocoholic” which, whatever might be the implications for an individual’s health, is always jocular.

In English, the use of the –nik suffix spiked after the USSR in October 1957 launched Sputnik, the first satellite to orbit the Earth although the earlier Yiddish forms (in Yinglish, the words contributed by Yiddish speakers from Eastern Europe) may also have exerted some regional influence, notably in New York where as early as the 1930s nudnik (an annoying person; a pest, a nag, a jerk) had spread beyond the Jewish community.  The association of with Sputnik created a minor industry among headline writers looking for words to describe the failures, explosions and crashes which were a feature of the launches in the early days of the US space program after the Russian’s satellite had so shocked the Americans.  The terms like kaputnik, dudnik and flopnik became briefly famous and contributed to the impression the Soviets were much more advanced in rocketry and related technology but that was misleading because the Russians had suffered just as many failures but theirs were a state secret and therefore unknown outside official circles while for the US launches were televised nationally on network television.  The perceptions generated by kaputnik, dudnik and flopnik also created a political ripple which would play out in the 1960 US presidential election and beyond.  Although Sputnik gave things quite a shove, the suffix had a long history in English and the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) notes raskolnik (a bit of a rascal) was in use by at least 1723.  After following the British Empire to the other side of the world, raskol washed up in PNG (Papua New Guinea) as a noun meaning “a criminal, operating sometimes as part of a gang”.  IN PNG, raskol was from the English rascal (a rogue, a scoundrel, a trickster) and entered Tok Pisin (“talk + pidgin”, one of PNG’s official languages and a creole of Indo-European, Malayo-Polynesian and Trans-New Guinean languages (principally English and Kuanua).  In later editions of The American Language (first published in 1919), the US satirist & critic HL Mencken (1880–1956 and a fair scholar of the tongue) credited the popularity of the practice of appending -nik to the ends of adjectives to create nouns to US Cartoonist Al Capp (1909–1979) who put a few of them in his syndicated Li'l Abner cartoon (1934-1977), Sputnik (1957) & beatnik (1958) respectively an accelerant or product of the process.

While it often was applied humorously, it also was used of those in Israel who refused to participate in military operations conducted by the Tsva ha-Hagana le-Yisra'el (the Israel Defence Forces (IDF)) in the occupied Palestinian territories (which the government of Israel calls “disputed territories” which the refuseniks regards as unlawful under international law.  Language matters much in the Middle East and some still use “Tel Aviv” as the synecdoche for “government of Israel” because recognition Jerusalem (another “disputed” space” as the capital is so limited.  Tel Aviv briefly was the capital between May 1948-December 1949 and a time when ongoing military conflict rendered Jerusalem too unstable for government operations.  Jerusalem was declared the capital in December 1949 and by mid-1950, most of the state’s administrative apparatus was based there but its status as a national capital is recognized by only a handful of nations.

Books (left & centre), academic journals and magazines used the title “Refusenik” in its original sense of “a Soviet citizen (usually Jewish) who was denied permission to emigrate from the Soviet Union (usually to Israel), something which was a feature of the Brezhnev-era (Leonid Brezhnev (1906–1982; Soviet leader 1964-1982)) USSR but it was later adopted (by extension) in the English-speaking world to refer to those refusing to cooperate with a system or comply with a law as a matter of political principle or because of a moral conviction.  Edited by self-described refusenik (in the later sense) Peretz Kidron (1933–2011) and published in 2013 by Bloomsbury, Refusenik (right) applied the word in the later sense of “those who refuse” rather than the original “those who were refused”.  With a blurb including a quote from linguistics theorist & public intellectual Professor Noam Chomsky (b 1928) and a foreword by author and essayist Susan Sontag (1933-2004), it’s possible a few positive reviews were written before a page was turned.

Mothball

Mothball (pronounced moth-ball or mawth-bawl (US))

(1) A small ball of naphthalene or sometimes of camphor for placing in closets or other storage areas to repel moths from clothing, blankets, etc.

(2) To put into storage or reserve; inactivate.

(3) Inactive; unused; stored away.

(4) A form of drug abuse where users inhale or ingest mothballs.  Users may hallucinate, feel a distorted sense of time and space, or experience rapidly changing emotions.  Side-effects include nausea, vomiting, slurred speech, headache, coordination loss, wheezing, and rashes.

1891: A compound word, (used also as also moth-ball & moth ball) used to describe the naphthalene ball stored among fabrics to keep off moths, the construct being moth + ball.  Moth (nocturnal lepidopterous insect) was from the Middle English motthe, from the Old English moþþe & moððe (mohðe in dialectical Northumbrian) and was a common Germanic word.  Related were the Old Norse motti, the Middle Dutch motte, the Dutch mot, & the German Motte (moth).  It may have been related to the Old English maða (maggot) or from the root of midge.  Until the sixteenth century, the word was used mostly to refer to the larva and usually in reference to devouring woollen fabrics, hence the translation (King James Version 1611) of Matthew 6:20 as “But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.”  Words for the adult moth in the Middle English included the mid-fourteenth century flindre which was cognate with the Dutch vlinder (butterfly).  As a literal description, the phrase "moth-eaten” was attested from the late fourteenth century, the figurative sense noted a few years later.  The related forms in the Romance languages are borrowings from the Germanic.  Ball was from the Middle English bal, ball & balle, from the Old English beall, beal & bealla (“round object, compact spherical body" and also "the spherical or similar object used in a game" dating from circa 1200) or the Old Norse bǫllr (a ball), evidenced by the diminutive bealluc (testicle), all from the Proto-Germanic balluz & ballô (ball), from the primitive Indo-European bholn- (bubble), from bhel (to blow, inflate, swell).  It was cognate with the Old Saxon ball, the Flemish bal, the Dutch bal, the Old High German bal & ballo, the German Ball (ball) & Ballen (bale). 

When used as a simple noun, mothballs are usually referred in the plural, that’s how they’re purchased and used.  A mothball is a small ball of chemical pesticide (typically naphthalene) and deodorant placed in or around clothing and other articles susceptible to damage from mold or moth larvae in order to protect them from this damage, the process being process is “mothballing” or to “mothball”.  In the pre-synthetic fibre era they were more widely used and the advent of modern chemical sprays has seen use diminish further.

Their cheapness and toxicity has seen them used also to repel snakes, squirrels, bats and other rodents, despite many jurisdictions making the use unlawful and a number of studies documenting the health risks to humans and other wildlife.  They’re also often suggests as a way for gardeners to eradicate snails but evidence of efficacy is only anecdotal although it does appear the use may cause at least illness in domestic pets.  As a verb, "mothball" is used metaphorically to mean "to stop work on an idea, plan, or job, but leaving things in such a state that work can later resume.

Mothballing

Mothballed WWII US Navy destroyers, 1947.

When the military, typically after longer conflicts, have too much capital equipment (tanks, ships, aircraft etc) but are, for a variety of reasons, unwilling to re-allocate, sell or consign the surplus to scrap, the storage process is called mothballing.  With airframes or land-vehicles, this involves hermetically sealing the structure and storing them in remote places with low humidity and rainfall (such as the Arizona desert).  For an admiralty, surface and underwater vessels are more of a challenge given they’re usually moored in salt-water.

The Imperial German Navy's High Seas Fleet, interned at Scapa Flow, 28 November 1918.

Mothballed ships made in the pre-atomic age (pre 1945) are also used to provide low-background steel for use in nuclear medicine experimental physics which demands shielding material which is extremely weakly radioactive (emitting less than present-day background radiation).  Steel manufactured after the first atmospheric nuclear explosions reflect the higher ambient level of radioactivity that fallout has caused.  Some of the capital ships of the Imperial German Navy’s High Seas fleet, scuttled in 1919, were an important source of such steel although, with atmospheric nuclear testing no longer undertaken, background radiation has decreased to near natural levels, so the need for low-background steel in medical machines now not usually needed.  However, for the equipment used in experimental physics where the most extreme sensitivity is required, the pre-1945 steel is still used.

AMARG, March 2015.

The 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (309th AMARG or, in military slang, “the Boneyard”) is a United States Air Force (USAF) aircraft and missile storage and maintenance facility in Tucson, Arizona, part of the Davis–Monthan Air Force Base.  For decades, AMARG, the largest facility of its type on the planet, has stored thousand of airframes in various states of repair, it’ location advantageous because of a low-humidity climate which minimises rust and corrosion and ground that is geologically stable and sufficiently hard so even the heaviest aircraft don’t sink into the soil.

Mothballed Boeing B-52s at AMARG, 1991.

In the 1990s, under the terms of the START I treaty, (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty; a 1991 bilateral treaty between the US & USSR and successor to SALT I & II (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks 1972 & 1979)), 365 of the USAF’s mothballed B-52 Stratofortress bombers stored at the Arizona boneyard were literally chopped into pieces, initially with a 13,000 (4850 kg) pound guillotine supported on a mobile crane.  The big blade was effective but brutish and the team soon switched to Husqvarna diamond-tipped fire-rescue  saws, the added precision less destructive on the surrounding equipment which afforded AMARC the opportunity to cannibalise the airframes for salvageable parts.

Wreckage of disabled B-52s of the US Air Force's (USAF) former Strategic Air Command (SAC) left in situ to permit satellite observation for purpose of verification by Russian Federation (successor-state to the USSR), 1994.

After the destruction was done, the wreckage was left in place for two months.  Under the START I terms which defined the verification process, both sides had sixty days to verify the other side’s conformity with the agreement using satellite over-flys.  Like most agreements between strategic adversaries, SALT & START operated under the principle of "trust but verify", the second element of that included because nobody believed in the first.  

Broadside (9 x 16” guns) from the USS Iowa.

The US Navy's four Iowa-class battleships were mothballed and re-commissioned several times between 1948 and 1991.  Launched between 1942-1944, their last period of active service was 1981-1991 as part of the Reagan Administration’s 600-ship navy policy.  Such was the cultural significance of the big battleships, although they were stricken from the Naval Vessel Register, instead of (as usual) being scrapped, all were donated for use as museum ships, the last in 2004.  They were big ships but not as wide as some of the Super Dreadnoughts (the beam of the Iowas about the same as the last battleship ever launched, the Royal Navy's HMS Vanguard (1946-1960)), the dimension dictated by the need to pass through the Panama Canal.