Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Only. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Only. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, June 25, 2023

Only

Only (pronounced ohn-lee)

Adverb

(1) Without others or anything further; alone; solely; exclusively.

(2) No more than; merely; just.

(3) As recently as.

(4) In the final outcome or decision.

Adjective

(5) Being the single one or the relatively few of the kind.

(6) Having no sibling or (less common) no sibling of the same sex (also a noun in this context).

(7) Mere (obsolete).

(8) Single in superiority or distinction; unique; the best.

Conjunction

(9) But (introducing a single restriction, restraining circumstance, or the like).

(10) Except (frowned upon by some).

Pre 900: From the Middle English oonly, onli, onlych, onelich & anely, from the Old English ānlich, ānlīc & ǣnlich (like; similar; equal; unique, solitary, literally "one-like”), from the Proto-Germanic ainalīkaz (one + -ly).  It was cognate with the Old Frisian einlik, the obsolete Dutch eenlijk, the German ähnlich (similar), the Old Norse álíkr, the Old High German einlih, the Danish einlig and the Swedish enlig (unified).  Synonyms include solitary & lone in one context and peerless & exclusive in the other.  Only is a noun, adjective, adverb & conjunction, onliness, onlyer & onlier are nouns and onliest & onlest are adjectives ; the noun plural is either onlys or onlies (both rarely used).

Only’s use as an adverb (alone, no other or others than; in but one manner; for but one purpose) and a conjunction (but, except) developed in Middle English.  In English, the familiar distinction of only and alone (now usually in reference to emotional states) is unusual; in many languages the same word serves for both although Modern German has the distinction in allein/einzig.  The mid fifteenth century phrase "only-begotten" is biblical, translating Latin unigenitus and Greek monogenes; the Old English word was ancenned. The term "only child" has been in use since at least the early eighteenth century.  The derived forms were once in more frequent use than now.  Someone who only adheres to the particular thing mentioned, excluding any alternatives. Onlyism (definitely non-standard) used to be quite a thing in Christianity in matters where there were different versions of documents and among Church of England congregations (often in the same parish) some were once adamant that only a certain edition of the Book of Common Prayer was acceptable and the others represented revisionism, heresy or, worse of all, smelled of popery.  Thus there were 1549-onlyiers, 1559-onlyiers, 1562-onlyiers etc.  The same factionalism of course continues to exist in many religions (and in secular movements and institutions too) but onlier has faded from use.  The adjectives onliest & onlest (a superlative form of only used almost exclusively in the US) are now rare and onlest is used mostly in African American Vernacular English (AAVE).  

The construct of the Old English ānlīc being ān (one) + -līc (-ly), only is thus understood in Modern English as on(e) + -ly.  One was from the Middle English oon, on, oan & an, from the Old English ān (one), from the Proto-West Germanic ain, from the Proto-Germanic ainaz (one), from the primitive Indo-European óynos (single, one).  It was cognate with the Scots ae, ane, wan & yin (one); the North Frisian ån (one), the Saterland Frisian aan (one), the West Frisian ien (one), the Dutch een & één (one), the German Low German een; the German ein & eins (one), the Swedish en (one), the Norwegian Nynorsk ein (one), the Icelandic einn (one), the Latin ūnus (one) & Old Latin oinos and the Russian оди́н (odín); doublet of Uno.

The –ly prefix was from the Middle English -ly, -li, -lik & -lich, from the Old English -līċ, from the Proto-West Germanic -līk, from the Proto-Germanic -līkaz (having the body or form of), from līką (body) (from whence Modern German gained lich); in form, it was probably influenced by the Old Norse -ligr (-ly) and was cognate with the Dutch -lijk, the German -lich and the Swedish -lig.  It was used (1) to form adjectives from nouns, the adjectives having the sense of "behaving like, having a likeness or having a nature typical of what is denoted by the noun" and (2) to form adjectives from nouns specifying time intervals, the adjectives having the sense of "occurring at such intervals".

The different phonological development of only and one was part of the evolution of English.  One was originally pronounced in the way which endures in only, atone and alone, a use which to this day persists in various dialectal forms (good 'un, young 'un, big 'un et al), the long standard pronunciation "wun" emerging around the fourteenth century in southwest and west England.  William Tyndale (circa1494–1536), who grew up in Gloucester, used the spelling “won” in his translations of the Bible which were first published between 1525-1526 and the form slowly spread until it was more or less universal by the mid-eighteenth century.  The later use as indefinite pronoun was influenced by the unrelated French on and Latin homo.

Tyndale, before being strangled and burned at the stake in Vilvoorde (Filford near Brussels).  Woodcut from The Book of Martyrs (1563) by John Foxe (circa 1516-1587).

The cardinals and bishops in England probably neither much noticed nor cared about Tyndale’s phonological choice but they certainly objected to his choice of words in translation (church became “congregation” and priest became “elder”) which appeared to threaten both the institution of the Church and the centrality to Christianity of the clerical hierarchy.  Tried for heresy in 1536, he was pronounced guilty and condemned to be burned at the stake although, for reasons not documented, he was, after a ceremonial defrocking, strangled until dead while tied to the stake, his corpse then burned.

Activist herbivore Tash Peterson (b circa 1995, centre) at a vegan protest, Perth, Australia.

Although a thing which pedants enjoy correcting, the placement of “only” as a modifier matters only if putting it one place or the other would hinder clarity; there’s never been an absolute grammatical rule and, as long as the meaning is clear, it’s probably better to adopt whatever is the usual conversational style.  Strictly speaking, although “We only fuck vegans” means an assertion of a life consisting of nothing else, most would understand it as a statement of one who is prepared to contemplate intimacy only with vegans.  The best compromise to adopt is probably that recommended for handling the split infinitive: Use the more exact “We fuck only vegans” in formal use such as in writing and the more natural, conversational “We only fuck vegans” otherwise.  Note that a sign held aloft at a protest, although obviously something “in writing” is not an example of formal use; it’s just part of the conversation.

No ambiguity: Lindsay Lohan in sweatshirt from the I Only Speak LiLohan range.

Care must be taken to avoid ambiguity, especially in writing because the intonations of speech and other visual clues are not there to assist in the conveying of meaning.  Were one to say “She only fucks vegans after midnight”, quite what is meant isn’t clear and the sentence is better rendered either as “she fucks only vegans after midnight" (ie carnivores need not apply) or “she fucks vegans only after midnight” (ie vegans must wait till the midnight hour).  In informal English, only is a common sentence connector but again, this should be avoided in formal writing where “only” should be placed directly before the word or words that it modifies.

Sunday, November 17, 2024

Now

Now (pronounced nou)

(1) At the present time or moment (literally a point in time).

(2) Without further delay; immediately; at once; at this time or juncture in some period under consideration or in some course of proceedings described.

(3) As “just now”, a time or moment in the immediate past (historically it existed as the now obsolete “but now” (very recently; not long ago; up to the present).

(4) Under the present or existing circumstances; as matters stand.

(5) Up-to-the-minute; fashionable, encompassing the latest ideas, fads or fashions (the “now look”, the “now generation” etc).

(6) In law, as “now wife”, the wife at the time a will is written (used to prevent any inheritance from being transferred to a person of a future marriage) (archaic).

(7) In phenomenology, a particular instant in time, as perceived at that instant.

Pre 900: From the Middle English now, nou & nu from the Old English (at the present time, at this moment, immediately), from the Proto-West Germanic , from the Proto-Germanic nu, from the primitive Indo-European (now) and cognate with the Old Norse nu, the Dutch nu, the German nun, the Old Frisian nu and the Gothic .  It was the source also of the Sanskrit and Avestan nu, the Old Persian nuram, the Hittite nuwa, the Greek nu & nun, the Latin nunc, the Old Church Slavonic nyne, the Lithuanian and the Old Irish nu-.  The original senses may have been akin to “newly, recently” and it was related to the root of new.  Since Old English it has been often merely emphatic, without any temporal sense (as in the emphatic use of “now then”, though that phrase originally meant “at the present time”, and also (by the early thirteenth century) “at once”.  In the early Middle English it often was written as one word.  The familiar use as a noun (the present time) emerged in the late fourteenth century while the adjective meaning “up to date” is listed by etymologists as a “mid 1960s revival” on the basis the word was used as an adjective with the sense of “current” between the late fourteenth and early nineteenth centuries.  The phrase “now and then” (occasionally; at one time and another) was in use by the mid 1400s, “now or never” having been in use since the early thirteenth century.  “Now” is widely used in idiomatic forms and as a conjunction & interjection.  Now is a noun, adjective & adverb, nowism, nowness & nowist are nouns; the noun plural is nows.

Right here, right now: Acid House remix of Greta Thunberg’s (b 2003) How dare you? speech by Theo Rio.

“Now” is one of the more widely used words in English and is understood to mean “at the present time or moment (literally a point in time)”.  However, it’s often used in a way which means something else: Were one to say “I’ll do it now”, in the narrow technical sense that really means “I’ll do it in the near future”.  Even things which are treated as happening “now” really aren’t such as seeing something.  Because light travels at a finite speed, it takes time for it to bounce from something to one’s eye so just about anything one sees in an exercise in looking back to the past.  Even when reading something on a screen or page one’s brain is processing something from a nanosecond (about one billionth of a second) earlier.  For most purposes, “now” is but a convincing (an convenient) illusion and even though, in certain, special sense, everything in the universe is happening at the same time (now) it’s not something that can ever be experienced because of the implications of relativity.  None of this causes many problems in life but among certain physicists and philosophers, there is a dispute about “now” and there are essentially three factions: (1) that “now” happened only once in the history of the known universe and cannot again exist until the universe ends, (2) that only “now” can exist and (3) that “now” cannot ever exist.

Does now exist? (2013), oil & acrylic on canvas by Fiona Rae (b 1963) on MutualArt.

The notion that “now” can have happened only once in the history of our universe (and according to the cosmological theorists variously there may be many universes (some which used to exist, some extant and some yet to be created) or our universe may now be in one of its many phases, each which will start and end with a unique “now”) is tied up with the nature of time, the mechanism upon which “now” depends not merely for definition but also for existence.  That faction deals with what is essentially an intellectual exercise whereas the other two operate where physics and linguistics intersect.  Within the faction which says "now can never exist" there is a sub-faction which holds that to say “now” cannot exist is a bit of a fudge in that it’s not that “now” never happens but only that it can only every be described as a particular form of “imaginary time”; an address in space-time in the past or future.  The purists however are absolutists and their proposition is tied up in the nature of infinity, something which renders it impossible ever exactly to define “now” because endlessly the decimal point can move so that “now” can only ever be tended towards and never attained.  If pushed, all they will concede is that “now” can be approximated for purposes of description but that’s not good enough: there is no now.

nower than now!: Lindsay Lohan on the cover of i-D magazine No.269, September, 2006.

The “only now can exist” faction find tiresome the proposition that “the moment we identify something as happening now, already it has passed”, making the point that “now” is the constant state of existence and that a mechanism like time exists only a thing of administrative convenience.  The “only now can exist” faction are most associated with the schools of presentism or phenomenology and argue only the present moment (now) is “real” and that any other fragment of time can only be described, the past existing only in memory and the future only as anticipation or imagination; “now” is the sole verifiable reality.  They are interested especially in what they call “change & becoming”, making the point the very notion of change demands a “now”: events happen and things become in the present; without a “now”, change and causality are unintelligible.  The debate between the factions hinges often on differing interpretations of time: whether fundamentally it is subjective or objective, continuous or discrete, dynamic or static.  Linguistically and practically, “now” remains central to the human experience but whether it corresponds to an independent metaphysical reality remains contested.

Monday, September 11, 2023

Sole

Sole (pronounced sohl)

(1) Being the only one; only.

(2) Being the only one of the kind; unique; unsurpassed; matchless.

(3) Belonging or pertaining to one individual or group to the exclusion of all others; exclusive.

(4) In law, un-married (archaic).

(5) The bottom or under-surface of the foot.

(6) The corresponding under part of a shoe, boot, or the like, or this part exclusive of the heel.

(7) The bottom, under surface, or lower part of anything.

(8) In carpentry, the underside of a plane.

(9) In golf, the part of the head of the club that touches the ground.

(10) A European flatfish, Solea solea.

(11) Any other flatfish of the families Soleidae and Cynoglossidae, having a hook-like snout.

1275-1325:  From the Old French soul & sol (only, alone, just), from the Vlugar Latin sola from the Late Latin sōlus (alone, only, single, sole; forsaken; extraordinary), replacing Middle English soule.  The source was the Classical Latin solea (sandal, bottom of a shoe; a flatfish), derivative of solum (base, bottom, ground, foundation, lowest point of a thing (hence “sole of the foot”)).  The Latin root begat similar words in many European languages: the Spanish suela, the Italian soglia and the Portuguese solha although, technically, the bottom of the foot is the planta, corresponding to the palm of the hand.  The Latin sōlus is of unknown origin but may be related to the primitive Indo-European reflexive root swo- from which English later gained "so".

A fossil flatfish.

The various common European flatfishes (of the ray-finned demersal order Pleuronectiformes) became known as sole in the mid-thirteenth century, an adoption of French use which followed the Latin which named the solea after the sandal because of the resemblance in shape to a flat shoe.  In English, the meaning "bottom of a shoe or boot" is from the late fourteenth century, and the cobbler’s phrase “to heal and sole a boot (or shoe)” to describe a repair or replacement is a verb form from the 1560s.  Another linguistic innovation of boot-makers was the noun insole (an inner lining of a shoe or boot affixed inside to the bottom and following exactly the shape) which appeared in 1838; it soon became known as the inner sole or inner-sole.

The use in both Church and common law to mean "single, alone, having no husband or wife” was an appropriation of form reflecting the normal, everyday meaning of the sole (one and only, singular, unique) and was first used in that context in the late fourteenth century and, in some technical uses, appeared still as late as the early nineteenth.  The adjective solely began to appear in the late fifteenth century.  A particular adjectival adoption was the direct borrowing from Latin of solus, used in the theatre for stage directions by 1590s.  It’s a masculine (the feminine is sola) but, as part of an industry-specific jargon, solus was used for both.  In certain circles, including poets and lawyers, use of the word persisted in old Latin phrases such as solus cum sola (alone with an unchaperoned woman) and solus cum solo (all on one's own” (which translates literally as "alone with alone")).

Studies of the soles of the Lindsay Lohan’s feet in three aspects.

Sole and its antecedents proved a a productive source in English, the soleus (muscle of the calf of the leg) a creation in the 1670s in the Modern Latin used in medicine and, like the fish, inspired by the similarity to the Roman shoe.  The adjective solitary (alone, living alone) was a mid-fourteenth century formation from the Old French solitaire, from the Latin solitarius (alone, lonely, isolated) from solitas (loneliness, solitude) from solus (alone).  The meaning "single, sole, only" is from 1742 and the related forms are a solitarily & solitariness.   It was a noun as early as the late 1300s but the most inventive adaptation was probably the 1690s prison slang in which it described the punishment of solitary confinement; in 1854 the phrase became an official part of the administration of jails.

Martin Luther aged 43 (1529) by Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472-1653).

As a Reformation coinage, solus also provided theology with the 1590s solifidian (one who believes in salvation by faith alone), a tenet of Protestant Christianity based on the translation by the dissident, one-time Augustinian monk Martin Luther (1483-1546) of Romans 3:28, the construct being solus (alone) + fides (faith) from the primitive Indo-European root bheidh- (to trust, confide, persuade).  It must have been a success because solifidian was used as an adjective early in the new century; the related form is solifidianism.  Philosophy gained solipsism, the theory that self is the only object of real knowledge or the only thing that is real and that all else must be denied.

The solo as a “piece of music for one voice or instrument” dates from the 1690s and was in English a commonly used adjective as early as 1712, although the early uses had nothing to do with music, instead referring to activities undertaken alone or unassisted.  The verb is first attested 1858 in the musical sense, 1886 in a non-musical sense and was adopted in the business of pilot training to describe a pupil’s first flight without an instructor in the cockpit.  Among those who attend rock concerts, there seems to be one faction which regards the drum solo as a highlight and one for which it's a bore to be endured.

A desolate emo.

Desolate, the emo’s standard alliterative companion to devastated, in the mid-1300s meant “a person disconsolate, miserable, overwhelmed with grief, deprived of comfort", extended later in the century to “persons without companions, solitary, lonely".  If the word didn’t exist, emos would have invented it.  By the early fifteenth century, it became applied to the natural environment to describe places, "uninhabited, abandoned" from the Latin desolatus, past participle of desolare (leave alone, desert), the construct being de- (completely) + solare (make lonely).  It’s not clear when it came also to be used as a criticism of urban, built environments (typically industrial or suburban) but it was well-established early in the twentieth century.  Desolation (sorrow, grief, personal affliction), circa 1400 meant the "action of laying waste, destruction or expulsion of inhabitants" is from the twelfth century Old French desolacion (desolation, devastation, hopelessness, despair) and directly from the Church Latin desolationem (nominative desolatio), a noun of action from the past-participle stem of desolare (leave alone, desert).  The sense of a "condition of being ruined or wasted, destruction" is from the early 1400 and the sense of "a desolated place, a devastated or lifeless region" is from 1610s.  Also emo-themed was the adjective sullen, a 1570s alteration of the Middle English soleyn (unique, singular) from the Anglo-French solein, formed on the pattern of the Old French solain (lonely), from the Latin solus.  The emo-inspired sense shift in Middle English from "solitary" to "morose" occurred in the late fourteenth century.  Solitude is from the mid-fourteenth century, from the Old French solitude (loneliness) and directly from the Latin solitudinem (nominative solitudo) (loneliness, being alone; lonely place, desert, wilderness) from solus but didn’t become common use in English until the seventeenth century.  The solitudinarian (a recluse, unsocial person) is recorded from 1690s and it’s perhaps surprising such a modern-sounding word isn’t today more popular.

Saint Augustine of Hippo (circa 1510) by Berto di Giovanni (d 1529).

The noun soliloquy is from the 1610s, from the Late Latin soliloquium (a talking to oneself", the construct being solus + loqui (to speak) from the primitive Indo-European root tolkw- (to speak).  Earlier, it appeared in a translation of the Latin Soliloquiorum libri duo a treatise by Saint Augustine (354-430), who is said to have coined the word, on analogy of Greek monologia.  The related form is soliloquent.

Sunday, July 30, 2023

Solipsism

Solipsism (pronounced sol-ip-siz-uhm)

(1) An extreme preoccupation with and indulgence of one's feelings, desires etc; egoistic self-absorption.

(2) In philosophy, the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.  The view or theory that self is the only object of real knowledge or the only thing that is real is technically, an extreme form of scepticism, a denial of the possibility knowledge can exists other than that of one's own existence.

1871: A invention of Modern English from the Latin, the construct being sōlus (alone) + ipse (self) + -ism.  The origin of sōlus is murky, some suggest a link with the earlier swolos, from the Proto-Italic swelos, from the primitive Indo-European swé, a reflexive pronoun from whence came se (oneself) + -los, hence the meaning "by oneself".  Another theory references solhz (whole, healthy) which would make it akin to sollus and salvus.  The third alternative is a connection with the Proto-Germanic sēliz, the Gothic sēls, (happy, good) and the Old English sēlra (better), again from the primitive Indo-European sōlhz (from whence sōlor (to console)).  Ipse (feminine ipsa, neuter ipsum; the demonstrative pronoun) was compounded from the primitive Indo-European éy and swé and, for highly technical reasons, was ipsus in the pre-classical lexicon.  Root of the –ism suffix was either the Ancient Greek -ισμός (-ismós), a suffix that forms abstract nouns of action, state, condition, doctrine; from stem of verbs in -ίζειν (-ízein) (from which English gained -ize), or was from the related Ancient Greek suffix -ισμα (-isma), which more specifically expressed a finished act or thing done.  Solipsism is a noun, solipsist is a noun & adjective, solipsistic is and adjective and solipsistically is an adverb; the noun plural is solipsisms.  For whatever reason, the potentially useful solipsismal seems never to have been coined.

Much ado about nothingness

Wanderer above the Sea of Fog (circa 1818) by Caspar David Friedrich (1774–1840).  German painters of the Romantic weren't necessarily the most solipsistic of the era but can seem so.  They painted under Hegel's long shadow. 

In casual use, solipsism is a useful word to refer to the self-obsessed and there are a lot of them about.  There is a solipsism quiz to work out the extent of one’s own tendency to the solipsistic.  Solipsism is the (ultimately wholly abstract) position in metaphysics that the mind is the only thing that can be known to exist and that knowledge of anything outside the mind is not merely false but unjustified.  It can be thought of as a sceptical hypothesis of life and, if pursued to as close to a logical conclusion as it allows, can lead only to a belief that the whole of reality and the external world and other people are merely representations of the individual self, having no independent existence of their own, and may not even exist.  It differs therefore from pure scepticism in that the solipsist is actually asserting something; it should instead be thought of as a fork of pure idealism.  In Philosophy 101 classes, it’s one of the tools to train the mind.  Lecturers find it amusing because there’s sometimes a student who takes all this seriously and starts to worry; sometimes for years.  Debates between nihilists and solipsists can’t of course happen but they do, descending often to a contest of onedownmanship about who holds the most extreme position.

For the modern young solipsist, there is only self & shopping.

The origins of Solipsism in western philosophy are in the writings of the Greek pre-Socratic sophist philosopher Gorgias (483–375 BC) who asserted (1) nothing exists, (2) even if something exists, nothing can be known about it and (3), even if something could be known about it, knowledge about it cannot be communicated to others.  That of course is internally perfect and can go no further but because solipsism can be neither proved nor disproved, some otherwise sensible folk felt obliged to bolt it onto the universe.  Philosopher Bishop George Berkeley (1685–1753), argued physical objects do not exist independently of the mind that perceives them and that an item truly exists only so long as it is observed (otherwise it is not only meaningless but simply non-existent).  Berkeley however argued this as part of his world-view which included God and God, even if one accepts he’s probably an Anglican, surely can’t be a solipsist although, if he is, truly we do know the mind of God.

Monday, December 5, 2022

Ovoid

Ovoid (pronounced oh-void)

(1) Egg-shaped (an oval, but more tapered at one end).

(2) In botany (of a fruit or similar part), egg-shaped with the broader end at the base.

1817: From the French ovoïde, from the New Latin ōvoīdēs, the construct being the Classical Latin ōvum (egg) + the Ancient Greek -oeidēs (like) (akin to -oid).  The Latin ōvum (egg) is thought derived from the primitive Indo-European awi (bird) which may be the source of wyo & yyo, the primitive Indo-European words for "egg" although this is speculative.  The hypothetical “evidence” for its existence is provided by the Sanskrit vih, the Avestan vish, the Latin avis (bird), the Ancient Greek aietos (eagle), the Old Church Slavonic aja, the Russian jajco, the Breton ui, the Welsh wy, the Old Norse egg, the Old High German ei and the Gothic ada, all meaning "egg."  The –oid suffix was from the Ancient Greek -ειδής (-eids) & -οειδής (-oeids) (the ο being the last vowel of the stem to which the suffix is attached) from εἶδος (eîdos) (form; like; likeness) and was added to indicate the meanings “tending towards”, “similar to” or “like”).  Ovoid is a noun & adjective and ovoidal is an adjective; the noun plural is ovoids.  The adjective ovoidish doesn't exist and never should because something "ovoidish" is actually an ovoid.  Subovoid (apparently never as sub-ovoid) is a technical word used in mathematics and some disciplines of engineering.

Headlights and Politics

Mercedes-Benz 300 SL roadster built for European sale (left) and one with the less elegant assembly (right) used in the US market to accommodate the sealed-beam headlights.

First seen two years earlier on the 300SL roadster (W198), the Lichteinheiten (light units) on the 1959 Mercedes-Benz 220 SE (W111) and the subsequent 1961 300SE (W112) were much admired, both for their elegance and quality of luminescence.  Ovoid in shape, they were first nicknamed “tombstone” but soon came to be called “European” because they were banned in the US, the saga illuminating how crony capitalism works in the West.  The US headlight manufacturers enjoyed a cosy relationship with the legislators who in the 1940s had passed laws decreeing cars sold in the US had to have two 7 inch sealed beam lights and a maximum of two auxiliary 5 ¾ inch units.  In 1957, the car and headlight manufacturers prevailed on the politicians additionally to permit four 5 ¾ inch sealed beam lights per vehicle, a profitable arrangement which pleased the industry but deprived US buyers of the much superior European lights which not only delivered better luminosity but, not being sealed units, required only the bulb to be replaced rather than the whole thing.  The US manufacturers had no interest in investing to re-tool their factories to produce something which would need to be replaced less often so arranged for the politicians to ban the newer product, thus for decades denying American drivers headlights of the quality enjoyed in Europe and much of the planet.  It wouldn't be until the 1970s when, needing a way to lower the hood (bonnet) lines to improve aerodynamic efficiency in the quest for lower fuel consumption to meet new standards, that the laws were changed.


Mercedes-Benz 280 SE 3.5 Coupés (W111), the "tombstone" or "European" headlight assemblies to the left, the version developed for the US market to the right.  Such was the international admiration for the "Californian" interpretation rapidly it became a global option.   

That is how politics in the US operates.  It’s in the congresses, state and federal, where things are actually hammered out and deals done.  Most of the world fixates on presidential politics because of the drama and the cults of personality but domestically, it’s in the legislatures that lobbyists do their work and that’s where they make "campaign contributions" in exchange for getting the legislation which most benefits the corporations employing them.  The business of America is business” is how former president Calvin Coolidge (1872–1933; US president 1923-1929) summed it up.  It’s not wholly dissimilar to the development of the English constitution; it took centuries to evolve but essentially, in exchange for getting the money he needed to fight his wars, the King of England approved the laws the politicians wished to pass.  In the US, the dynamic relationship is between politicians & corporations, mediated by the lobbyists and between the two sides, there's much interchanging of personnel which is why the system is sometimes described by political scientists as "incestuous".

Unfortunately, US regulations proved disfiguring as well as dimming because the simple solution of integrating the turn-signal indicators (the "flashers" to many) and side-marker lamps into the assembly didn’t comply.  As explained by automotive lighting expert Daniel Stern, the lit area was probably compliant (the rules specified a minimum 3½ square inches (22.5 cm2) but the intensity and inboard visibility angles would have been inadequate.  A turn signal with its centre 4 inches (100 mm) or closer to the low-beam lamp had to provide at least 500 candela on-axis, which would be close to impossible for a lamp with this construction; turn signals more than 4 inches from the low-beam needed only to provide at least 200 candela.  The rest of the world (RoW) cars (left) were supplied with the original elegant design while for the US market some rather ugly after-market lamps were crudely added to the gaps next to the grill (centre).  Late in the 1960s, the aesthetics were improved somewhat by using a larger unit (right) which emulated the look of a fog-lamp, the US cars by then also suffering the addition of side-marker lights front & rear.

A variation on the ovoid theme was revealed when the 600 Grosser (W100) was announced in 1963 (left).  The solution, designed to comply with US legislation (right) was more unhappy even that that used on the 300 SL and called to mind a high-school project which deservedly would have been graded "F".

The design created for the US market W111s adopted a vertically stacked arrangement with four 5 ¾ inch sealed beams which, ironically, was much to influence US designers in the decade to come.  When the 300 SEL 6.3 was introduced in 1967, Europeans were offered the choice of either style, four of the newer quartz-halogen bulbs generating even more light than the ovoid system.  Europeans, who nicknamed the stacked lights “Californian” (California apparently the most American thing imaginable), came to admire the style, prompting Mercedes-Benz to offer buyers the option world-wide.  Unfortunately, this was Mercedes-Benz only ascetically successful adaption for the US market, most of the others being ghastly.  In the mid-1960s, the factory again used “California” when the W113 (the 230/250/280 SL "pagoda" (1963-1971)) was for some years offered with just a hard-top, presumably because, viewed from often gloomy Stuttgart, California must have seemed permanently sunny.  The W111’s headlamps spread to other models but the W113 hard-top only configuration remained a one-off.  It was one of only three occasions a production SL would be offered without a folding top and one of two with only a fixed roof.

Lindsay Lohan in sunglasses with lens in an irregular ovoid.  The irregular ovoid is a popular shape for the lens of spectacles of all kinds, simply because it conforms so well to the lacuna defined by the nose and eye socket.

The four common descriptors in diagnostic imaging (left to right), the round, the oval the ovoidesque irregular oval and the irregular.

Reflecting the frequency with which they occur, in radiology and other forms of diagnostic imaging, the three classic shapes of “masses of interest” are round, oval and irregular but a frequent descriptor of those which often resemble ovoids is the “irregular oval” used (a little misleadingly for non-clinicians) to describe everything which tends towards being an oval but is outside the defined tolerance.  The rationale in adding an adjectival “irregular” to “oval” seems to be to reflect the wide variation in the shapes, the only common characteristic being that to fit the description it must be vaguely ovoid in shape, distinguishing it not only from a round or oval but also from an irregular (ie everything else).

Tuesday, May 10, 2022

Alligate

Alligate (pronounced al-i-geyt)

To attach; to bind together (obsolete).

1535–1545: As alligāte, from the Latin alligātus (tied, bound), past participle of alligāre & second-person plural present active imperative of alligō (I bind), the construct being al- + lig- (bind) + -ate.  In Latin, the al- prefix was a euphonic alteration of ad-, assimilating the D into the initial L of the word the prefix is applied to.  The English form was from the Middle English al-, from the Old English eal- & eall- (all-).  The suffix -ate was a word-forming element used in forming nouns from Latin words ending in -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as estate, primate & senate).  Those that came to English via French often began with -at, but an -e was added in the fifteenth century or later to indicate the long vowel.  It can also mark adjectives formed from Latin perfect passive participle suffixes of first conjugation verbs -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as desolate, moderate & separate).  Again, often they were adopted in Middle English with an –at suffix, the -e appended after circa 1400; a doublet of –ee.  Alligate was a verb, the third-person singular simple present was alligates, pthe resent participle alligating and the simple past and past participle alligated.  Alligated was the adjective.

The only word with which alligate might have been confused was the early thirteenth century allgate (all of the time, on all occasions (and by mid century "in every way")), probably from the Old Norse phrase alla gotu (a way); it picked up the adverbial genitive -s from the late fourteenth century to become allgates.  Fortunately though, both alligate & allgate are obsolete although alligate does occasionally appear in literary fiction, something which doubtless delights some and annoys others.

Alligators and crocodiles

The reptile alligator is a crocodilian in the genus Alligator of the family Alligatoridae, two species of which remain extant, the American alligator (A. mississippiensis) and the Chinese (A. sinensis), a number of extinct species known from the fossil record, the first dating from the Oligocene epoch, some 37 million years ago.  The word alligator is thought to be an anglicized form of the mid-sixteenth century Spanish el lagarto (the lizard), the construct being el (the) + lagarto (lizard), from the Vulgar Latin lacertus (lizard), the term adopted by early Spanish explorers in Florida and reflecting this, the early (an now extinct) spellings in English included alligater, alligarta, aligarto, alegarto & alagarto, many probably the result of transcription from oral sources.  It wasn’t until 1807 that the spelling in English was settled as alligator and that was thought to be influenced by the previously unrelated Latin alligāte (to attach; to bind together), those involved in the early taxonomy of zoology and botany always anxious to maintain a Classical connection.  In that it was probably alligāte’s last contribution to English.

Looking very similar to untrained eyes, alligators and crocodiles are both large, lizard-like reptiles famous for their large, powerful jaws, sharp teeth, long tails, and skin which varies from the thick and plated protective covering on the upper body and the softer skin on the belly, the much sought-after examples being those with the patterns and colours best suited to handbags, shoes and upholstery.  Alligators tend to be darker and have broader snout and when in the water, usually lurk under the surface, with only the eyes visible.  In contrast, crocodiles typically hold the top of their head out of the water and a distinguishing physical difference is visible when the jaws are closed, only the only their upper teeth of an alligator displayed but both the upper and lower teeth of crocodiles remain exposed .  Alligators now live almost exclusively in the south-eastern US and eastern China whereas crocodiles are found in the tropical areas of Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Australia.  The once common co-habitation of the species in the wild is now rare but has been documented in southern Florida.  Taxonomically, alligators and crocodiles are not only separate  species but belong to different genera (alligators belong to the genus Alligator, crocodiles belong to the Crocodylus) but both are of the order Crocodylia, so to refer to them all as crocodilians is correct, reflecting the divergence long ago from the last common ancestor (LCA).  They behave differently, crocodiles usually more aggressive than alligators although in Australia there are the “freshwater crocodiles” which are notably more passive though the terminology can be dangerously misleading, “saltwater crocodiles” inhabiting rivers and lakes.  Along with birds, they are the only living descendants of the ancient archosaurs.

The alligator clip

It’s a charming linguistic coincidence that the alligator clip (which attaches things together), named apparently because of the visual similarity to the reptile’s jaws, seems also linked to the Latin alligāte (to attach; to bind together).  That’s almost certainly not true but, if it did at the time occur to anyone, it definitely was alligāte’s last contribution to English.  Curiously, in some markets they’re called crocodile clips although internationally, there’s no difference in technical specification noted between the two and it seems only localized traditions of use which account for the two names (a la cantaloupe v rock melon, aubergine v eggplant etc).

Despite that, had the industry wished, product differentiation would have been possible because in the products available, there are variations in design which align with the anatomical variations between the reptiles.  There are clips with U shaped and V shaped jaws so they could have been named differently although the manufacturers don’t respect the variations in dental anatomy, both types produced with one or both rows of teeth visible when the jaws are closed and there are specialized clips with one row or none.  One noted adaptation is the alligator hairclip with elongated, curved, jaws.

Alligator hair clip.