Pleonasm & Tautology

Pleonasm (pronounced plee-uh-naz-uhm)

(1) In rhetoric, the use of more words than are necessary to express an idea; a redundancy in wording.

(2) An instance of this, as free gift or true fact.

(3) Any redundant word or expression.

(4) In a variety of disciplines, an excess in the number or size of parts (now rare except in pathology).

1580–1590: A learned borrowing from the French pléonasme, from the Late Latin pleonasmus, from the Ancient Greek πλεονασμός (pleonasmós) (redundancy, surplus), from πλεονάζω (pleonázō) (to be superfluous), from pleonázein (to be or have more than enough (in grammatical use "superfluously to add”)), a combining form of πλείων (pleíōn) (more), from the primitive Indo-European root pele- (to fill).  The adjective pleonastic (characterized by pleonasm, redundant in language, using more words than are necessary to express an idea) dates from 1778 although sources list the related pleonastical as being in use since the 1650s.  Pleonasm is a noun, pleonastic and pleonasmic are adjectives and pleonastically & pleonasmically are adverbs; the noun plural is pleonasms.  Despite the modern practice, verb forms seem never to have evolved.

Tautology (pronounced taw-tol-uh-jee)

(1) The needless repetition of an idea, especially in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clarity of meaning.

(2) In formal logic, as a logical tautology, something true under any possible case or interpretation; it differs from the linguistic form in that in propositional logic it’s a compound propositional form in which all instances simultaneously are true.

(3) In pathology, an excess in the number or size of parts (archaic).

(4) In engineering, the addition of a strengthening device to a design in which all calculations prove it unnecessary.  By convention tautology is applied to small-scale instances whereas a redundancy tends to be larger, extending even to duplicated systems.

1570–1580: From the Late Latin tautologia (representation of the same thing in other words), from the Ancient Greek ταὐτολογία (tautología from tautologos) (a repetition of something already said (the word originally from rhetoric)), the construct being ταὐτός (tautós) (the same) + λόγος (lógos) (saying; explanation), related to legein (to say), from the primitive Indo-European root leg- (to collect, gather).  The modern version is tauto- +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism et al).  Tautology, tautologism & tautologist are nouns, tautologize is a verb, tautologically & tautologously are adverbs and tautological, tautologic & tautologous are adjectives; the noun plural is tautologies.

A tautology is the unnecessary repetition (often in close proximity) of an idea, statement, or word in circumstances in which the meaning has already been expressed.  In the expression 4 am in the morning”, the tautology is created by morning because am (an abbreviation of the Latin ante meridiem (before noon) has already established an unambiguous meaning.  For technical reasons however the odd tautology may be required, 4 am in the morning once used for the lyrics of a pop song because, were either of the tautological elements to be removed, the rhythm of the tune would be lost.  In the same manner a poet might be moved (poets are often moved) to write of the dawn’s sunrise and that’s one word too many but the tautology might be justified if it adds to the lyrical quality (something not guaranteed in poetry).  Tautologies seem sometimes to be used to add emphasis or strengthen a meaning and thus function adjectivally.  To say completely and totally beyond my comprehension and understanding technically loses nothing if either of the two tautological pairs are pared down but the practice is common as a rhetorical device and probably often effective as long as the wordiness is restricted to the odd flourish and doesn’t infect the rest of the speech.  A device of oral use therefore but usually an absurdity in writing.

Tautologies abound but those who condemn need to consider the context and history.  The phrase PIN number has long been ubiquitous and sounds right but seems wrong once deconstructed: undo the acronym and it becomes personal identification number number; what has happened is either PIN has become a word or PIN number an encapsulated phrase.  Democratic English resolves the argument in the usual manner: pedants can have their PINs while the rest of us use pin numbers.  In commerce, tautologies are often part of what the law describes as “mere puffery”.  A phrase like absolutely unique and a one-off, something of a favorite of antique dealers, is not only a tautology but not infrequently also an untruth but in the business such things are understood.  Forgivable then in a way that the linguistic sin very unique is not often tolerated by the fastidious although strangely, quite unique seems to be, presumably because it’s a more elegant construction.

Pleonasm refers to overabundance, and is mow rarely used outside of the medical context in which it describes aspects of tissue growth.  A linguistic pleonasm is usually identified as a phrase with more words than necessary, often by being repetitive or having empty or clichéd words, but is not necessarily wrong or confusing.  At the margins the difference between tautology and pleonasm does get ragged and not all dictionaries and style guides agree.  The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) indicates the difference seems to be between redundancy of expression and repetition and as a general principle that’s probably helpful, if not exhaustive.  One suggestion of a method to define a tautology is to substitute an antonym for one of the allegedly offending elements.  That works well if it creates contradictions in terms like 4 pm in the morning or the dawn’s sunset but doesn’t resolve everything.  A pleasurable delight seems a pleonasm because it uses unnecessary words to make the point and, under the test, a tautology because there are presumably no un-pleasurable delights although even then there are nuances because the rare delicacy most would enjoy as a delight might to someone with a specific allergy be not at all enjoyable.

Actually, biological reactions aside, something most would not find a delight can to others be entirely that.  In Freudian psychoanalysis, Lustprinzip (the pleasure principle) describes the driving force of the id: the human instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.  However, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders notes the existence of masochism in various forms which involve pleasure being gained from pain.  Thus the connotations of words are a subjective and not objective test for there are those for whom pleasurable pain needs to be distinguished from un-pleasurable pain, the latter a mere tautology to most.  Sexual masochism disorder (SMD) had an interesting history in the DSM.  It wasn’t in the first edition (DSM-1, 1952) but in the second edition (DSM-II 1968) the only mention of masochism was in the categorization of sexual deviations, then defined as applying to those individuals for who sexual interest was directed primarily towards objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts not usually associated with coitus, or toward coitus performed under bizarre circumstances as in necrophilia, pedophilia, sexual sadism, and fetishism.  It was noted that while many patients found their practices distasteful, they were unable to substitute normal sexual behavior and the diagnostic criteria was also exclusionary, noting the diagnosis was not appropriate for individuals who perform deviant sexual acts because normal sexual objects are not available to them.  This changed little in the third & fourth editions issued between 1980-2000 which refined the technical description and diagnostic criteria.  In the fifth editions (2013-2022), while classified as one of the paraphilias (algolagnic disorders) and thus "anomalous activity preferences", clinicians were advised a formal diagnosis of SMD was appropriate only if individual experiences clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.  By 2013 the DSM seemed to be back where Freud had started.

A mammary pleonasm (or tautology depending on one's view): Jasmine Tridevil during addition and the final result.

Pleonasm should not be confused with pleomastia (now largely supplanted by polymastia in clinical use) which is the condition of having more than two mammary glands (breasts) or nipples.  It’s a rare condition which doesn’t present in the geometrically perfect example presented in 2014 by Jasmine Tridevil, the stage name of Florida massage therapist Alisha Jasmine Hessler (b 1993).  Ms Tridevil initially claimed to have had the central unit implanted by a plastic surgeon but later admitted it was a construction made substantially of latex and silicone, attached to her with surgical glue, helpfully providing photographs of the maintenance being undertaken.  However, encouraged by enjoying more than fifteen minutes of fame, in 2019 Ms Tridevil sought to crowdfund the money (apparently US$50-000) needed actually to have the surgery performed.  Progress on this project hasn’t been reported but Ms Tridevil has maintained her presence on a number of internet platforms including vlogs on topics as varied as "How to dominate your boyfriend" and “My gothic Christmas tree”.

The offence caused by unnecessary words is such that not only do tautology and pleonasm exist but for serious critics there’s also auxesis (from the Ancient Greek: αὔξησις (aúxēsis) (growth; increase (which in rhetoric references various forms of increase)) and describes exaggerated language, battology (from the Ancient Greek βαττολογία (battología) (stammering speech)) which is the repeated reiteration of the same words, phrases, or ideas and perissology (from the Latin perissologia) which is the use of more words than are necessary to convey meaning.  At the margins, there’s often a bit of overlap so care need to be taken that one’s critique of a redundant (and all the constructions are really forks of that) word or phrase doesn’t itself commit the same offence.  Grammar Nazis of course delight in faulting others when they use a tautology, some particularly pedantic even correcting other obsessives who might wrongly have tagged a tautology when really they should have perceived a pleonasm.

Lien

Lien (pronounced leen or lee-uhn)

(1) In law, the legal claim of one person upon the property of another person to secure the payment of a debt or satisfaction of an obligation; a right to retain possession of another's property pending discharge of a debt.

(2) In anatomy, a tendon (obsolete).

(3) An alternative form of lain (archaic, used in early translations of the Bible).

1525–1535: An Anglo-French borrowing from the Old French from the Latin ligāmen (bond; tie; bandage) from ligāre (to bind) and ligō (tie, bind), the construct being ligā(re) (to tie) + -men (the Latin noun suffix).  The Latin liēn (spleen) was borrowed by late medieval anatomists as a descriptor of tendons but is long obsolete.  The associated words used in this context include claim, charge, right, encumbrance, mortgage, incumbrance and hypothecation but not all translate literally (or by implication) between legal systems or jurisdictions.  Lien is a noun & verb and lienal & lienable are adjectives; the noun plural is liens.  Lien’s use as an alternative form of lain is a historic relic, now best-known from its use (with variation in spelling) in the King James Version of the Bible (KJV, 1611):

And Abimelech said, What is this thou hast done vnto vs? one of the people might lightly haue lien with thy wife, and thou shouldest haue brought guiltinesse vpon vs.  (Genesis 26:10)

And the Priest shall charge her by an othe, and say vnto the woman, If no man haue lyen with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to vncleannesse with another in stead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse.  (Numbers 5:19)

The lien at common law, equity and admiralty law

At common law, a lien was a right to retain property in one’s possession until payment was made.  That basic right has in many jurisdictions since been modified but the principle remains of a security interest granted over physical property to secure the payment of a debt or discharge of some other obligation.  Historically, the owner of the property (grantee of the lien) was the lienee and the lien holder the lienor but, in modern use, these terms are less used.  An equitable lien differs from a common law lien in that the former depended on actual possession of physical property and conferred a right to retain the good(s) until payment, whereas an equitable lien existed regardless of the state of possession, conferring on the holder the right to seek judicial redress in the absence of payment.  Legal scholars have long treated equitable liens as a strange collective of property rights, considering them generally as sui generis (special; different; literally “of its own kind or class”.)

Equitable liens came to be created for same reason that much equity law developed: application of the rigid rules of common law, in certain situations, could give rise to injustice.  A common-law lien (1) confers only a right to retain physical property, (2) cannot be transferred, (3) cannot be asserted by third parties to whom possession of the property has been extended to pay or undertake whatever the original party should have performed and (4), if the property is handed to the lienor, the lien is for all time sundered.  In Hewett v Court (1983) 149 CLR 639, the High Court of Australia (HCA) defined the essential characteristics of an equitable lien.  It (1) arises by operation of law so as to do justice between parties by adjusting their mutual rights and interests, (2) is not contingent on any contractual right or interest, or by reason of possession of the property, (3) becomes apparent from the relationship between the parties, (4) constitutes an equitable charge over the property and (5), creates a right to obtain an order for payment.

The quirkiest flavor is the maritime lien (sometimes known as tacit hypothecation), a peculiarity of admiralty law.  It is a lien over a vessel, granted to secure the claim of a creditor who provided maritime services to the vessel or who suffered an injury from the vessel's use.  Something of an aquatic hybrid, it creates upon ships, security interests of a nature otherwise unknown to common law or equity, something explained by ships being (1) big, (2) expensive and (3) able to move from one jurisdiction to another.  The concept of a maritime lien is similar to that which can be imposed on any other real property in that it allows for a vessel to be seized if the relevant debt remains unpaid at the effective date.  So, were the purchaser of a vessel to fail to pay (or cease making payments as required by the contract of sale), the vessel may be seized by the authorities and depending on the jurisdiction, there can be other mechanisms such as is often the case in the US where if the contract of sale wasn’t executed using the device of a PSM (preferred ship mortgage), the lien can be granted without consent (ie it’s invoked automatically).

It can be arrested.

As a general principle, a maritime lien can be placed on any vessel still “in navigation”. Quite when a vessel can be considered “in navigation” or not is usually uncontroversial but courts have had sometimes been required to rule on the matter, often in personal injury cases.  The simple explanation is that a vessel is regarded as “in navigation” if it’s fit to operate; that means it could (physically and legally) be used on the waters as intended, not that it’s necessarily “being navigated” on a waterway”.  A vessel undergoing minor repairs would in many circumstances be judged capable of operating (even if it’s been static for some time) whereas one only partially constructed or undergoing a large-scale overhaul would not.  Counterintuitively, a vessel in a shipyard’s dry dock (ie not even “in the water”) can be held to be “in navigation” if found to be still “fit to sail”, the courts deciding each case on its merits, considering factors such as the duration, cost and nature of maintenance being performed and whether the vessel’s master or owner had taken any steps consistent with the vessel’s status being “out of service”.

It can also be arrested.

However, a maritime lien taken against a PSM must be recorded and in that it’s a unique type and in most jurisdictions the filing is with a central repository such as a maritime registry or its associated documentation centre.  Once registered in the correct form, the lien becomes valid and enforceable.  All other maritime liens come as a result of actions pursuant to contracts or in tort and these can cover just about anything transactional (unpaid freight or harbor charges, damages caused by the vessel (pollution, collisions with other vessels or shore facilities, loading or unloading events et al), unpaid wages, breach of charter, personal injury et al.  What makes a lien under admiralty law very different is in the mechanism of enforcement which can involve a court issuing an arrest warrant for the vessel, enabling seizure by the authorities.  This differs from a lien taken over a skyscraper which can be subject to many things if a lien is enforced but not arrest.  The reason for the difference is a skyscraper can’t sail out of a jurisdiction and the act of arrest is thus redundant.  In the same way a corporation can, as a “legal fiction” be thought a “person”, so can a ship be “arrested”.  Like a lien upon landed structures, in legal theory size doesn’t matter and a court can order the arrest of the smallest dinghy but the orders are usually made against vessels of high-value.

Scrofulous

Scrofulous (pronounced skrof-yuh-luhs)

(1) In pathology, pertaining to, resembling, of the nature of, or affected with scrofula.

(2) In figurative use, degraded, morally tainted or degenerate.

(3) In figurative use, Having an unkempt, unhealthy appearance.

1605–1615: The construct was scroful(a) + -ous.  Scrofula (primary tuberculosis of the lymphatic glands, especially those of the neck) dates from 1350–1400, from the Middle English scrofula (the plural), from the Medieval Latin scrophulosus & scrōfulae (swollen glands in the neck (literally “little sows”)), the construct being scrōf(a) (a sow) + -ulae (the plural suffix), the derivation explained by the belief breeding sows were particularly susceptible to the disease.  Scrofula is most common in children and is usually spread by unpasteurized milk from infected cows; No longer in technical use, scrofula was also known as “the king’s evil”; as part of the mystique of monarchy, the kings of England and France long pretended to possess the power of curing scrofula by touching the sore, a belief which endured and as late as the eighteenth century, there were still doctors who believed the only cure was to be touched by a member of a royal family.  Improvements in social conditions and treatment meant scrofula became a less common disease in adults by mid- twentieth century although it persisted in children.  With the spread of HIV-AIDS reaching critical mass in the 1980s, there was a resurgence in scrofula and it’s been linked also with monkeypox.  Despite the similarity is spelling, the word scruff is unrelated, being an Old English term for dandruff, the generalized sense of someone who is “rough and dirty” (and thus scruffy) dates from 1871.  Scrofulous is an adjective, scrofulously is an adverb and scrofulousness & scrofuloderma are nouns

The –ous suffix was from the Middle English -ous, from the Old French –ous & -eux, from the Latin -ōsus (full, full of); a doublet of -ose in an unstressed position.  It was used to form adjectives from nouns, to denote possession or presence of a quality in any degree, commonly in abundance.  In chemistry, it has a specific technical application, used in the nomenclature to name chemical compounds in which a specified chemical element has a lower oxidation number than in the equivalent compound whose name ends in the suffix -ic.  For example sulphuric acid (H₂SO₄) has more oxygen atoms per molecule than sulphurous acid (H₂SO₃).

Scott Morrison's five other jobs

Prime-Minister Scott Morrison in parliament while also holding five ministerial appointments.

The revelation former Australian prime-minister Scott Morrison (b 1968; prime minister of Australia 2018-2022), in much secrecy, had himself appointed himself to five ministerial roles in addition to being the head of government attracted some interest.  The public reaction was muted given the rather arcane administrative mechanisms involved but the usual suspects (journalists and political commentators) seemed to think it a great scandal, an opinion loudly and repeatedly expressed by Her Majesty’s loyal opposition who seemed most interested of all.  Others who had their attention stirred were those of his former colleagues (including the Secretary-General of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)) who were unaware they were job-sharing with the prime-minister until they read about it in the Murdoch press.

Between March 2020 and May 2021, Mr Morrison, on paper, appeared to centralize power in his office by becoming Australia's minister of health, finance, resources, home affairs and the treasury.  In practice, the powers accrued seem to have been exercised only once but that was in a way which appears to violate the agreement between the Liberal and National parties which provides the parameters for the coalition arrangements maintained in government.  Even that, whatever the political implications, doesn’t seem to suggest anything unlawful and the general conclusion which has emerged is that the additional appointments were constitutional.  Whether there are technical reasons which operate to mean the parliament should have been informed is a matter for debate but unarguably, to do so is at least a convention.

Minister for Health #1 & Minister for Health #2 (#2 a replica rather than a fake or imitation).

The This uncertainty and the opposition’s inability to cite specific unlawfulness is why the attack on Mr Morrison was received, outside of the usual suspects, with such indifference, the suggestion of a general moral scrofulousness hardly the same thing as a smoking gun.  What the strange tale did provide was an opportunity for the amateur psychoanalysts to ponder Mr Morrison’s motives and map them onto his well-known world view which is that of an evangelical, born-again Christian.  In justifying his actions because the COVID-19 pandemic meant “these were unprecedented times which required extraordinary measures” and that “no prime-minister… had faced the same circumstances” and added that "there was a clear expectation established in the public's mind, certainly in the media's mind, and absolutely in the mind of the opposition… that I, as Prime Minister, was responsible pretty much for every single thing that was going on".  It was an interesting observation given that almost immediately the pandemic was declared an ad-hoc “national cabinet” was convened, consisting of the prime-minister and the eight premiers & chief-ministers and there was at least as much focus on that eight as there was on the prime-minister.

That was of course inevitable because of the way the Australian constitutions divides the heads of power between the Commonwealth and the states and Mr Morrison, during the pandemic, showed little hesitation in ascribing responsibility for many unpopular measures to the premiers.  In that he was quite correct and there is little to suggest there was a public perception focused wholly on him.  Indeed, what the operations of governments during the pandemic did illustrate was just how extensive are the residual powers of the states, despite a century or more of centralization of power by the actions of the Commonwealth and decision of the High Court.  Still, Mr Morrison says he felt the way he did and was presumably content to be the savior of the nation at its moment of need, an intoxicating prospect for any politician.

Despite the frequency with which it’s used, no edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has ever used the term "messiah complex" (a desire and compulsion to redeem or save others or the world, a form of megalomania in which the individual experiences delusions of grandeur) although other diagnosis are listed which contain at least some of the elements which are understood as being identified with the syndrome.  Of course, there was also the matter of him not trusting some of his ministers to be sufficiently competent to deal with a genuine crisis and it has to be admitted some of his more average ministers (some of them very average) didn’t inspire confidence.

In the chair: Woodrow Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference.  A Peace Conference at the Quai d’Orsay (1919), oil on canvas by William Orpen (1878–1931).

Those who believe in God, miracles, and that divine providence has chosen them for a special role probably don’t often trouble themselves with tiresome details, something the British diplomat Harold Nicolson (1886-1968) noted of Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924; US president 1913-1921) at the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920): “That spiritual arrogance which seems inseparable from the harder form of religion had eaten deep into his soul”.  “This intellectual disability rendered him blindly impervious, not merely to human character, but also shades of difference.  He possessed no gift for differentiation, no capacity for adjustment to circumstances.  It was his spiritual and mental rigidity which proved his undoing.  It rendered him as incapable of withstanding criticism as of absorbing advice.  It rendered him blind to all realities which did not accord with his own preconceived theory, even to the realities of his own decisions”.

Most interesting perhaps is that the revelation of this matter is a story in itself and one which seems to confirm Mr Morrison’s sincerity of purpose in originally having himself created minister of this and that.  Because, in constitutional theory, ministers exercise the powers of the sovereign and many of those powers are limited to a particular minister, in a time of crisis, it can make things worse if a minister is unavailable.  Mr Morrison says he thought at the time the pandemic was declared, the information from overseas was dire and it wasn’t impossible that were the virus to take hold in Australia, it was not impossible ministers might drop dead (the Lord forbid, obviously) and it was thus a sensible precaution to have a backup for ministers serving in critical areas.  Not wishing to burden others, he assumed the duties himself.

Prime-ministerial intrusions into matters beyond their remit have over the years been a thread in a number of memoirs by members of cabinets who at times felt usurped but Mr Morrison's actually cloning and in parallel assuming another's constitutional authority was most unusual.  Some however were interested in other fields and, responding to accusations prime-minister Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) was too activist in the conduct of the war and too inclined to interfere in military tactics and strategy, the political cartoonist David Low (1891-1963) in 1942 commented by depicting the PM as a politician-cum-general-cum-admiral-cum-air-marshal.  There was something in the criticism in that much like Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) and others not professional soldiers, Churchill was interested in grand strategy and the minutiae of detail like the calibre of shells but not the vast logistical & organizational operations which tend ultimately to determine success or failure.  Churchill certainly tried to exert influence on his military advisors in favor of his pet projects (of which there were many) and while some were inspired and (especially in the early stages of US involvement in the conflict) wise, the war effort was undoubtedly aided by the chiefs of staff resisting some of his more Napoleonic visions of battle, ensuring Quixotic ventures in the Baltic or the Far East never proceeded.                 

The multiple ministries Mr Morrison discussed some two years ago, in a matter-of-fact manner, with two journalists writing a book about the pandemic.  That this wasn’t revealed for two years seems to be simply because it was a good, juicy bit of the book which the authors didn’t wish to reveal in advance.  When it was published, it was mentioned just as an interesting aspect of pandemic management with not a hint it might be thought improper or even unusual, the secrecy mentioned but only in the sense of it be just one of the many things governments keep secret, so as not to frighten the horses.  It made the front page of the national daily but not as the headline, only a “color” piece rather than the lede, the details on page 2 while the main story was within, a discussion of the book.  Intriguingly for students for media management and the generation of moral panics, the media essentially ignored the story for two days before joining the opposition’s bandwagon attempting to paint the former prime-minister as morally scrofulous.  At that point it did get more interesting, Mr Morrison having appointed himself to five portfolios rather than the two he mentioned and that he’d actually once exercised the powers secretly vested and in a matter which had nothing to do with the pandemic.  What may be of interest is what's not (yet) known.  Whether the power Mr Morrison enjoyed as being minister of this and that was exercised to allocate public money for some purpose isn't known but if such allocations did in secret happen would be a matter pursue.  If the appointments were lawful (as all assume) there presumably any exercise of ministerial power would presumably also be lawful, however politically toxic it may retrospectively prove.  Case law will be of no guide because there have never been, as far as is known, any such cases.    

A quizzical look.  Mr Morrison, who still can't see what all the fuss is about.

Mr Morrison did call a press conference and there the evasive answers and obfuscation began.  His response to his actual exercise of one minister’s nominal authority was so carefully lawyered it should be a model answer for any law student explaining what a minister must do to conform with the demands of administrative law and in claiming he would publicly have advised of his appointment(s) had he exercised the power(s) was simply an untruth.  When asked why he’d vetoed something within the remit of the resources minister, he’d responded that it was within his power as prime-minister.  Still, however economical with the truth he may have been, all appears to have been lawful and presumably if God was that concerned about lying, he’d have added an eleventh commandant.

Cyrillic

Cyrillic (pronounced si-ril-ik)

(1) Noting or pertaining to a script derived from Greek uncials and traditionally held to have been invented by Saint Cyril, first used for the writing of Old Church Slavonic and adopted with minor modifications for the writing of Russian, Bulgarian, Serbian, and some non-Slavic languages of Central Asia.

(2) Of or relating to Saint Cyril.

1842: From the Medieval Latin Cyrillicus, the construct being Cyrill(us) (Saint Cyril) + -icus or –ic (the Latin suffix added to a noun, adjective, verb, etc to form an adjective.  From an i-stem + -cus, occurring in some original case and later used freely. It was cognate with the Ancient Greek -ικός (-ikós), the Proto-Germanic -igaz, the Old High German & Old English -ig, and the Gothic -eigs).  The name Cyril is from the Medieval Latin Cyrillicus & Cȳrillus was from the Ancient Greek Κῡ́ρῐλλος (Kū́rillos or Kyrillos) (literally "lordly, masterful”) and related to kyrios (lord, master).  The name Cyril is from the Late Latin Cyrillus, from the Ancient Greek Kyrillos (literally "lordly, masterful) and related to kyrios (lord, master).

From the Balkans to Moscow

Saints Cyril and Methodius (1912), oil on canvas, by Uroš Predić (1857-1953).

Dating from the ninth century, the early Cyrillic replaced the Glagolitic script earlier created by Saints Cyril and Methodius as something easier for the copyist to write and for the foreigner to acquire and the same disciples that created the new Slavic script in Bulgaria.  Becoming the official Bulgarian script after being brought into general use by St. Cyril's pupil, Clement (first bishop of Bulgaria) in 893, Cyrillic became the basis of alphabets used in various languages, especially those of Orthodox Slavic origin, and non-Slavic languages influenced by Russian.  Today, it’s used by some two-hundred and fifty million people in Eurasia as their official alphabet, Russians accounting for about half of them.  With the accession of Bulgaria to the European Union in 2007, Cyrillic became the third official script of the European Union, following Latin and Greek.

Lindsay Lohan in Moscow for the FIA Formula E ePrix, June 2015.  In Cyrillic Russian, Lindsay Lohan is spelled Линдси Лохан.

Cyrillic is a derivative of the Greek uncial script, augmented by letters from the older Glagolitic alphabet, including some ligatures, letters used in Old Church Slavonic sounds not found in Greek. The script is named in honor of two Byzantine brothers, Saints Cyril and Methodius, who earlier had created the Glagolitic alphabet; despite the name and some Medieval myth-making, the script was conceived and popularized by the followers of Cyril and Methodius, rather than the saintly brothers; the name Cyrillic denotes homage rather than authorship.  In the early eighteenth century, the Cyrillic script used in Russia was modernized by Peter, the new letterforms being closer to the Latin alphabet with several archaic letters removed and some new ones personally designed by the Tsar himself, the best known of which is Я, inspired by the Latin R.

Resin

Resin (pronounced rez-in)

(1) Any of a group of non-volatile solid or semisolid organic substances & compounds (that consist of amorphous mixtures of carboxylic acids), obtained directly from certain plants as exudations of such as copal, rosin & amber (or prepared by polymerization of simple molecules) and used typically in pharmaceuticals, plastic production, lacquers, adhesives and varnishes.

(2) A substance of this type obtained from certain pine trees (also called rosin).

(3) To treat, rub or coat with resin.

(4) A precipitate formed by the addition of water to certain tinctures.

(5) Any of various artificial substances, such as polyurethane, that possess similar properties to natural resins and used in the production of plastics; any synthetic compound with similar properties.

1350–1400: From the Middle English resyn & resyne (hardened secretions of various plants), from the Old French resine (gum, resin), from the Latin rēsīna (resin), from the Ancient Greek rhētī́nē (resin of the pine tree), both probably from a non-Indo-European language.  In chemistry, the word came to be applied to synthetic products by after 1883.  The verb resinate (impregnate with resin) dated from 1756.  The adjective resinous (of the nature of, pertaining to, or obtained from resin) is documented since the 1640s, from the Latin resinosus; the earlier adjective was resiny (having a character or quality like resin), noted since the 1570s.  The related (and now rare) noun rosin (distillate of turpentine (especially when in a solid state and employed for ordinary purposes)) dates from the late thirteenth century and was from the Old French raisine & rousine, both variants of résine; it was used as a verb after the mid-fifteenth century.  The later adjectives resiniferous & resinless appear never to have been used except in chemistry or technical literature in relevant industries, the more common forms in general use being resin-like or resinous.  Because the word resin covers a wide field of substances, it usually appears in modified form (acaroid resin, acrylic resin, epoxy resin, phenolic resin, polyresin, polyvinyl resin et al).  The present participle is resining and the past participle resined.  Resin, resinousness & resinite are nouns, resinously is an adverb and resinify is a verb; the noun plural is resins.

The Citroën SM and Michelin's resin wheels

1972 Citroën SM with Michelin RR wheels. 

Although sometimes referred to as being made from “carbon fibre”, materials engineers insist the optional wheels offered on the Citroën SM must be described as “synthetic resin reinforced with long-strand carbon fibre”.  Notable as the first composite road wheel offered for public sale, they were developed by Michelin, the tyre-maker which since 1934 had been Citroën’s parent corporation and the innovation was an appropriate accessory for the SM which, upon release in 1971, was immediately recognized as among the planet's most intricate and intriguing cars.  A descendant of the DS which in 1955 had been even more of a sensation, it took Citroën not only up-market but into a niche the SM had created, nothing quite like it previously existing, the combination of a large (in European terms), front-wheel-drive (FWD) luxury coupé with hydro-pneumatic suspension, self-centreing (Vari-Power) steering, high-pressure braking and a four-cam V6 engine, unique in the world.  The engine had been developed by Maserati, one of Citroën’s recent acquisitions and the name acknowledged the Italian debt, SM standing for Systemé Maserati.  Although, given the size and weight of the SM, the V6 was of modest displacement to attract lower taxes (initially 2.7 litres (163 cubic inch)) and power was limited (181 HP (133 kW)) compared to the competition, such was the slipperiness of the body's aerodynamics that in terms of top speed, it was at least a match for most.

Michelin RR wheel on Citroën SM.

However, lacking the high-performance pedigree enjoy by some of that competition, a rallying campaign had been planned as a promotional tool.  Although obviously unsuited to circuit racing, the big, heavy SM didn’t immediately commend itself as a rally car; early tests indicated some potential but there was a need radically to reduce weight.  One obvious candidate was the steel wheels but attempts to use lightweight aluminum units proved abortive, cracking encountered when tested under rally conditions.  Michelin immediately offered to develop glass-fibre reinforced resin wheels, the company familiar with the material which had proved durable when tested under extreme loads.  Called the Michelin RR (roues resin (resin wheel)), the new wheels were created as a one-piece mold, made entirely of resin except for some embedded steel reinforcements at the stud holes to distribute the stresses.  At around 9.4 lb (4¼ kg) apiece, they were less than half the weight of a steel wheel and in testing proved as strong and reliable as Michelin had promised.  Thus satisfied, Citroën went rallying.

Citroën SM, Morocco Rally, 1971.

The improbable rally car proved a success, winning first time out in the 1971 Morocco Rally and further success followed.  Strangely, the 1970s proved an era of heavy cruisers doing well in the sport, Mercedes-Benz winning long-distance events with their 450 SLC 5.0 which was both the first V8 and the first car with an automatic transmission to win a European rally.  Stranger still, Ford in Australia re-purposed one of the Falcon GTHO Phase IV race cars which had become redundant when the programme was cancelled in 1972 and the thing proved surprisingly competitive during the brief periods it was mobile, the lack of suitable tyres for the large, heavy machine meaning the sidewalls repeatedly failed.  The SM, GTHO & SLC proved a quixotic tilt and, for better (Group B, 1982-1986) and worse (everything else), the sport went a different direction.  On the SM, the resin wheels had proved their durability, not one failing during the whole campaign and, encouraged by customer requests, Citroën in 1972 offered them as a factory option although only in Europe; apparently the thought of asking the US federal safety regulators to approve "plastic wheels" (as they’d already been dubbed by the motoring press) seemed to the French so absurd they never bothered to submit an application.

Reproduction RR wheel in aluminum. 

Michelin ceased to make the RR when SM production ended in 1975 but did provide another batch for sale in the mid 1980s and this was said to be a new production run rather than unsold stock.  A cult accessory for a cult car, perfect examples now sell for around US$2000 each which does sound expensive but, given what it can cost to restore (or even maintain) a SM, it’s not a significant sum and, unlike much of the rest of the machine, the RRs are at least trouble-free.  Michelin are not said to be contemplating resuming production but another company has produced visually identical wheels made from aluminum; these only slightly heavier.  Despite the success and the fifty-year history of robustness, Citroën didn’t persist and the rest of the industry never adopted the resin wheel.  The reason was two-fold: (1) Even if economies of scale operated to lower the unit cost, the technology was always going to be more expensive than using aluminum and advances in alloys meant the metal units can provide similar strength with only a slight weight penalty and (2) the resin was always susceptible to high temperatures, something not encountered on the SM which used inboard brakes.  Most cars don’t use inboard brakes and as Ford found when testing resin wheels during Lincoln's downsizing programme in the mid-1970s, although the weight reduction was impressive, almost the same was possible with aluminum at much lower cost and the problems caused by heat-soak from the brakes were insoluble.  So it proved until the late 1980s when, with the development of new, heat-resistant materials, reinforced resin wheels were made available on the limited-production Dodge Shelby CSX (1989).

1973 Citroën SM with reproduction RR wheels in aluminium. 

True carbon fibre wheels have had a little more success, although only at the top-end of the market, Koenigsegg in 2013 manufacturing carbon fibre single-piece wheels which it offered as a US$40,000 option; a number which needs to be considered in the context of the US$2 million price tag for one of their cars.  Porsche, Mercedes-Benz, Ferrari and Ford have all flirted with carbon fibre wheels and some manufactures are interested in the possibilities offered by hybrid designs which use aluminum for some components and carbon fibre for others, an idea familiar from earlier steel/aluminum combinations.  Regulatory authorities are apparently still pondering things.

Lindsay Lohan in Tsubi Scooter Jeans, Andrea Brueckner Saddle Bag, L.A.M.B. Lambstooth sweater, Manolo Blahnik Butterfly sandals & Louis Vuitton Inclusion resin bangles, Los Angeles, April 2005.

The SM V8

1974 prototype Citroën SM with 4.0 V8.

Ambitious as in 1971 it so obviously was, circumstances combined in a curious way that might have made the SM more remarkable still.  By 1973, sales of the SM, after an encouraging start, had for two years been in decline, a reputation for unreliability already tarnishing its reputation but the first oil shock dealt what appeared to be a fatal blow; from selling almost 5000 in 1971, by 1974 production numbered not even 300.  The market for fast, thirsty cars had shrunk and most of the trans-Atlantic hybrids (combining elegant European coachwork with large, powerful and cheap US V8s), which had for more than a decade done good business as alternative to the highly strung Italian thoroughbreds, had been driven extinct.  Counter-intuitively, Citroën’s solution was to develop an even thirstier V8 SM and that actually made sense because, in an attempt to amortize costs, the SM’s platform had been used as the basis for the new Maserati Quattroporte but, bigger and heavier still, performance was sub-standard and the theory was a V8 version would transform both and appeal to the US market, then the hope of many struggling European manufacturers.

Recreation of 1974 Citroën SM V8 prototype.

Citroën didn’t have a V8; Maserati did but it origins were in racing and while its (never wholly tamed) raucous qualities suited the character of the sports cars and saloons Maserati offered in the 1960s & 1970s, it would have been less than ideal for something like the SM.  However, the SM’s Maserati V6 was a 90^o unit and thus inherently better suited to an eight-cylinder configuration.  Therefore, in 1974, a 4.0 litre (244 cubic inch) V8 based on the V6 (by then 3.0 litres (181 cubic inch)) was quickly built and installed in an SM which was subjected to the usual battery of tests over a reported 20,000 km (12,000 miles) during which it was said to have performed faultlessly.  Unfortunately, bankruptcy (to which the SM, along with some of the company's other ventures, notably the GZ Wankel programme, contributed) was the death knell for SM production and the one-off V8 prototype was scrapped while the unique engine was removed and stored, later used to create a replica of the 1974 test mule.

The abortive Traction Avant V8

Citroën Traction Avant 22 (V8), Paris Motor Show, 1934 (the coupé below, the berline on the raised platform).  The frontal styling with the fared-in headlights would have been exclusive to the V8.

It was a shame because, despite being most associated with the US, it was the French engineer Léon Levavasseur (1863–1922) who in 1904 created the first V8 engine and at the 1934 Paris Motor Show, Citroën displayed their “TA 22”, a variation of their Traction Avant model but fitted with a 3.8 litre (233 cubic inch) V8, created by joining on a common crankcase two of their 1.9 litre (117 cubic inch) four-cylinder units.  When presented at the show, several models were displayed and the promotional material confirmed the 22 would be available with a choice of coachwork including the berline (four-door saloon), familiale (long wheelbase (LWB) nine-passenger, four-door saloon with 3 rows of seats), two-door coupé and decapotable (two-door cabriolet).  Bankruptcy however halted the project and Michelin, having just taken corporate control, insisted the company concentrate on the best-selling, most profitable lines.  A reputed two dozen-odd 22s were built before the Michelin Man dropped his axe and it's never been clear if any passed into private hands in V8 form, most of the pre-production run having been re-fitted with standard 11 CV four cylinder engines under the usual hood (bonnet) and wings before being sold as 11 CVs.  Inevitably, rumours abound, the most persistent being (1) an unnamed doctor or dentist in Brittany or Gascony locked a 22 CV in a barn where it remains, perfectly preserved and (2) there's one in a "secret garage" hidden somewhere in the Far-East, a remnant of the French colonial presence in Indo-China.  There's also the tale that one of the pre-production run displayed at the Paris Motor Show was stored in an underground car-park (in a "bricked-up room" to conceal it from the Nazi occupation forces which had a great fondness for the Traction Avant) in the Javel district of Paris (close to the Citroën factory) and it survived the war, only to be "destroyed" by Pierre "PJB" Boulanger (Pierre-Jules Boulanger, 1885–1950; chairman of Citroën 1935-1950).  Monsieur Boulanger was killed in an accident at the wheel of a Traction Avant 15-Six but, like the other legends, there's no documentary evidence of any of the V8 cars existing after 1935.  In recent years, some aficionados have built V8 Traction Avants in the style of the 22 CVs, most fitted with contemporary Ford flathead V8s, an engine produced in several versions in France during the 1930s.   

1938 Citroën 11B Traction Avant coupé, one for four built in 1938 from a total production of 15.  Lovely though the art deco lines were, the 11B’s performance was rendered mediocre by the use of the even then rather agricultural 1.9 litre four-cylinder engine which, with twin downdraft carburetors, generated only 46 horsepower at a 3800 RPM of some harshness.  In the US, the memorable coffin-nose Cord 810 & 812 had already proved a power-train which combined a V8 with FWD could work and such a powerplant for the Traction Avant would have been transformative.  That the project was abandoned was one of many entries in the company’s long list of missed opportunities.

1937 Cord 812 Phaeton (left) and 1967 Cadillac Eldorado (right).

Thirty years apart, Cord and Cadillac demonstrated the big, FWD coupé could be made to work.  Rushed into production, the Cord had flaws but in a more buoyant economy might the resources might have been found to rectify the problems.  The Eldorado used an unusual chain-drive(!) version of the General Motors (GM) Turbo-Hydramatic automatic transmission which at the time raised the odd eyebrow but, coupled with engines as large as 500 cubic inches (8.2 litres), it proved robust and reliable.  Whatever happened later, in the 1960s, Cadillac's engineering was still the "standard of the world".

Evidence does however suggest a V8 SM would likely have been a failure, just compounding the existing error on an even grander scale.  It’s true that Oldsmobile and Cadillac had offered big FWD coupés with great success since the mid 1960s but they were very different machines to the SM and appealed to a different market.  Probably the first car to explore what demand might have existed for a V8 SM was the hardly successful 1986 Lancia Thema 8·32 which used the Ferrari 2.9 litre (179 cubic inch) V8 in a FWD platform.  Although well-executed within the limitations the configuration imposed, it was about a daft an idea as it sounds.  Even had the V8 SM been all-wheel-drive (AWD) it would probably still have been a failure but it would now be remembered as a revolution ahead of its time.  As it is, the whole SM story is just another cul-de-sac, albeit one which has become a (mostly) fondly-regarded cult.