Today's post (or in any case this one) will be about the illustrious and highly multifarious topic of...
The English Language! Renowned for it's obfuscation to anyone not a native speaker, and no wonder for it's tremendous confusion, you see, with all the repetitions of words with differentiations of meaning, elitist and perfectionist linguists, who, as a whole, do not include me as a member in ANY DEGREE, and the wondrous, wonderful, and neat words. I'll open with a list of my favorite syllabics of English (as is evident, I happen to like quite a many):
•Incognito. It possesses the i-t without a disgusting sound, in fact seeming vaguely of Romance language.
•Obfuscating. You've guessed this, haven't you? Too little of folk use it nowadays... A pity.
•Dickensian. Hearkens of everything Oliver Twist and David Copperfield; including the moving passages, stunning characters, and wonderful names, even not the extremely obfuscating phraseology (Which is a word your opinionated Author believes professors of English primarily use).
•Cherish. Raindrops on roses & whiskers on kittens are brought to mind, candy hearts, and golden roses, et all...!
•Rhodomontade. Unless you REALLY paid attention reading Northanger Abbey, this will not occur much in your day-to-day discourse. In case Good Reader is wondering, it means hubris or arrogance; bluster, or, Merriam-Webster informs me (for even I need the dictionary, in fact without it...) a rant.
•Incidentally. It's "by the way" in one word, four syllables, and intelligence. Not to say only people with an extensive vocabulary are intelligent, mind you.
To differentiate this from the stock pedagogical pamphlet of pandering professors of prose and picky declamations of precision, there might be a bit of ranting. And naturally my rhodomontadenous (That is not "rhododendron." It is the adjectival form of rhodomontade) voice.
Firstly, I would explain my method of talking: This will overlap with the second mark. Tell you what, while it is highly convoluted, almost fatuous, sanctimonious, supercilious and tiring, I would MUCH rather sound like, say, Elizabeth Bennet with my "Good graciouses" and "My heavens" than a common dis-user of language and profanity (Yes, okay, it is nice to swear oaths when your dog happens to be particularly annoying... or a un-premeditated faceplant, but I prefer a modicum!). It may sound like Robert Bulwar-Lytton's infamous opening sentence ("It was a dark, and stormy night" Which personally I adore) Nonetheless, Reader, it is far superior to "Yo, #YOLOswag,". Savvy?
Secondly, there is a great many words in our language, common and uncommon, contemporary and antique. While I cannot encroach on anyone else's method of reading or writing, or talking or speech, I CAN include a bit about the origins and words in English. Especially those that I use!
Between the fog and heath of Scotland, the cold of Scandinavia, and the guttural pre-German a language evolved in England: Old English. This was not even the English of "When that Aprile with his shoures soote... When Zephyrus eek his sweet breath" and its Canterbury Tales, this was a different entity hundreds of years before at the time of Rome's fall: the fifth century. Even, in England, there were dialects in Northumberland, Wales, the center of England, London...making many people's language mutually indecipherable. This went on until the eleven-hundreds, at the advent of Middle-English. That is fairly obfuscating to a contemporary reader also. Think Shakespeare's Folios... With "e"'s, "y"'s "u"'s, and elsewise confusing additions and deductions.
Geoffrey Chaucer was heavily responsible for the beginning of Middle-English, also (Chaucer's "eek", in case you're wondering) with the amount of authors evolving their tongue, it was impossible for change.
By the time of Queen Elizabeth it all was fairly straightforward. Shakespeare did his thing, the common rabble ate it up, the gentry raised their eyebrows and stifled smiles, Elizabeth ruled, London was a veritable hive of villainy, et all. (Incidentally Shakespeare's writ was more complex than the common language of that time).
Ahem. Merriam-Webster is a sapient thing indeed.
BUT, I digress. While we have the means and references to speak our language why don't we? The adjective "brainy" is not in personal use, for the preferred medium of conveying that thought? Under erudite's jurisdiction. Prats, jesters, celebrities, jackanapes, mendicants, eleemosynary personages, lovely ones, foolish ones, cheery ones, phlegmatic ones all go around... Well, you can't cover all of them with a few words and an adjective. Language, language, language, ladies and gentlemen and let us all persist verbose.
Thanks for reading, er, Reader,
-Anacostia Mirabow-Marignac.
No comments:
Post a Comment