Search us!

Search The Word Detective and our family of websites:

This is the easiest way to find a column on a particular word or phrase.

To search for a specific phrase, put it between quotation marks.

 

Ask a Question!

Puzzled by Posh?
Confounded by Cattycorner?
Baffled by Balderdash?
Flummoxed by Flabbergast?
Perplexed by Pandemonium?
Nonplussed by... Nonplussed?
Annoyed by Alliteration?

Don't be shy!
Send in your question!

 

TWD on Kindle

----------

Get with the future!

Subscribe to The Word Detective on Kindle!

Read it in your flying car!

----------

 

 

 

Alphabetical Index
of Columns January 2007 to present.

 

Archives 2006 – present

Old Archives

Columns from 1995 to 2006 are slowly being added to the above archives. For the moment, they can best be found by using the Search box at the top of this column.

 

If you would like to be notified when each monthly update is posted here, sign up for our free Topica email notification list.

 

 

 

 

And don't forget to visit

How Come?

for answers to the science questions you've always wondered about.

Ask a question, win a book!

 

 

 

October 2011 Issue

Semper Ubi Sub Ubi

readme:

So I turned on the local news the other night to see when it would stop raining. I wasn’t really paying close attention; I actually had my back to the TV and was writing something. After a few minutes, however, it percolated into my frontal cortex that the people on the tee-vee were very excited about something, so I turned around and noticed that emblazoned across the screen in flashing orange was FEROCIOUS WILD ANIMALS ON THE LOOSE — RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! or words to that effect. Turns out that some … jerk, to put it mildly … had been keeping fifty or so lions, tigers, mountain lions, cheetahs, wolves, grizzly bears, black bears and monkeys, plus a giraffe, in tiny cages on his “wildlife preserve” west of Zanesville. And now, for whatever reason, he had chosen a dark, rainy evening to turn them all loose and then shoot himself. You saw all this as the top story on CNN, the BBC, et al., I’m sure.

The particular problem for us at that moment was that the “preserve” was just about 25 miles due east of us. That sounds like a long way away, but it’s all open, mostly flat country around here, and the authorities seemed a bit unclear as to exactly how long these animals had been loose — at least five or six hours at that point. Still, it seemed unlikely that they would make it this far, or it did until the news helpfully reported that there had been credible sightings in southern Licking County, about seven miles away.

So it’s a dark and stormy night, and we’re sitting in the proverbial isolated farmhouse, with lots of big windows and flimsy doors, surrounded by cornfields and our own woods backing up on a few hundred more acres of cornfields. I have already learned to be careful when I take the dogs out at night because the coyotes around here are numerous and aggressive. And there have been consistent and credible reports in recent years of large cats, probably escapees from just such private zoos, being spotted (and in one case photographed) in our area.

And now we apparently had a wave of ticked-off tigers, grizzlies and lions headed our way. What I wanted at that moment was a bunch of floodlights and an AK-47. What we had were two arthritic dogs, both largely deaf, and a whole lot of useless but no doubt tasty cats. Around 2 am it occurred to me that for any large and hungry carnivore downwind of us, our house would smell like a big box of food. And these critters were accustomed to being around (and fed by) people, so the natural shyness that keeps coyotes (mostly) at bay would be, as HR Haldeman would say, inoperable.

Continue reading this post » » »

Catch 22

Like turning on the TV to find out why the power’s off.

Dear Word Detective: What does “Catch 22″ actually mean? — Faith Daniels.

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time; And all our yesterdays ….

Oh hi! I was just brushing up on my Macbeth and thinking about your question. I knew I had answered it before, and not too long ago, I thought. Then I discovered that “not too long ago” was circa 1995. Gosh. On the other hand, intimations of mortality aside, I’m glad you asked it, because in the intervening years no one else has, and it’s an interesting story.

I’m not sure that you meant to, but you’ve asked your question in an intriguing way. The “actual meaning” of “Catch 22″ seems to be undergoing some dilution in the mass media these days. A recent article in The Times of India was titled “Catch 22: Caught between mother and wife,” and offered some rather retrograde and sitcom-ish advice to men having trouble achieving domestic balance (e.g., “Do not praise the one’s cooking in front of the other”). Elsewhere in the media, “Tibetan MPs caught in a ‘Catch-22′ situation” (Indian Express) outlines some difficulties posed by the Dalai Lama’s recent decision to retire. One article describes a possible conflict, the other assesses an apparent impasse, but neither situation fits the original definition of a “Catch 22.”

As defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, “Catch 22″ means “a supposed law or regulation containing provisions which are mutually frustrating; a set of circumstances in which one requirement, etc., is dependent upon another, which is in turn dependent upon the first.” One example that popped into my mind when I first explained “Catch 22″ was needing to have a driver’s license in order to get to the Department of Motor Vehicles to take your driver’s license exam. Another was needing to be rich in order to hire enough lawyers, etc., to avoid paying taxes and be rich. Although “Catch 22″ has come to be used in a more general sense to mean “an absurd predicament” or “a tricky and frustrating rule or restriction” (such as having to pay taxes on money you withdraw from your retirement fund to use to pay taxes), the true “Catch 22″ presents not just an annoying impediment, but a solid brick wall.

“Catch 22″ is one of those rare colloquial phrases whose origin is known with absolute certainty. It was coined by the American novelist Joseph Heller in 1961 as the title of his novel “Catch 22,” based on his experiences as a US bomber pilot in Europe in World War II. The central character in the book is the B-25 bombardier Yossarian, whose all-too-accurate perception of the futility and insanity of war introduces him to what Heller dubbed “Catch 22″ (“catch” being used here in the sense of a “snag” or “hidden trap” in military regulations). As Heller explains it, “There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr [an especially hapless pilot] was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.”

“Catch 22″ the novel was a huge hit in the 1960s, and remains one of the seminal late 20th century works of literature. The phrase “Catch 22″ immediately entered the lexicon of a society beset by an increasingly Kafkaesque bureaucracy (“His Public Interest Group now finds itself in a Catch 22 situation. It cannot prove the device works without EPA funds, but EPA won’t grant the funds unless they prove the device works,” 1974), a plague of institutional illogic that computers have only worsened. Interestingly, the “22″ in the title was not Heller’s original choice; an early excerpt of the novel published in a magazine was actually titled “Catch 18,” but the publication of the very popular novel “Mila 18″ by Leon Uris during the same period necessitated the change to “Catch 22.”

Pinch of salt

Yeah, right.

Dear Word Detective: Where does the phrase “to take what he says with a pinch of salt” come from and how does it relate to not entirely believing what someone tells you? — Tom.

Good question. Speaking of salt, whatever happened to that business about too much of the stuff being bad for you? I’m no foodie; the three food groups that prance proudly through my daily diet are fat, salt and sugar. But lately, whenever I eat in a restaurant, I’m amazed at the insane amount of salt they put in and on everything. I guess I’m supposed to drink lots of beer. Don’t hold your breath.

Then again, salt (sodium chloride to its friends) is essential to life as we know it, so better too much than none, I suppose. We inherited our modern English word “salt” from the Old English “sealt,” which in turn came from the Latin “sal” and the Greek “hals,” which meant both “salt” and “sea.”

Salt has played a vital role in human civilization, and that importance is reflected in the remarkable number of popular words and phrases that center on salt. Roman soldiers were given an allowance, called a “salarium,” with which to buy salt to make their food more palatable; that Latin word lives on in our modern “salary.” Salt was not only a necessity of life but also a symbol of worth and value. “To be worth one’s salt” was a measure of a person’s capability and effectiveness, and “to eat salt with” someone was to enjoy their hospitality and friendship. To be seated “above the salt” (referring to the salt cellar traditionally placed in the middle of a dinner table) was to be closer to the host and thus in a position of favor and privilege. When Jesus told his followers that they were “the salt of the earth,” he was invoking salt as a symbol of incorruptibility and honesty. Salt was also a metaphor for that which makes life worthwhile and interesting (“He was a man not yet forty years of age, with still much of the salt of youth about him,” Trollope, 1866), as well as spirit and wit in conversation or writing (“She speaks with salt, And has a pretty scornefulnesse,” 1639).

“To take something with a pinch of salt” (or “with a grain of salt”) means to accept a statement with a certain amount of skepticism and not to assume that it is entirely accurate or complete (“A more critical spirit slowly developed, so that Cicero and his friends took more than the proverbial pinch of salt before swallowing everything written by these earlier authors,” 1943). The expression has been found in print in English starting in the mid-17th century, though it is probably much older.

The simplest explanation for “with a pinch of salt” is that the phrase likens accepting a statement with skepticism to making an iffy dish of food more palatable with a dash of salt, a metaphor nicely illustrated by the quotation about Cicero above. There is, however, a more colorful story associated with the idiom. The Roman historian Pliny the Elder, recounting the conquest of Pontus by the armies of Rome, reported that the Roman general Pompey had discovered that the vanquished king, Mithridates (still with me?), had made himself immune to poisons by taking small doses of poison along with “a grain of salt.” It’s pretty clear that Pliny took Pompey’s story literally, but Medieval writers apparently decided that Pliny was using “grain of salt” to indicate that he was skeptical of Pompey’s account. Thus, goes the tale, “grain of salt” meaning “with some doubts” goes all the way back to Pliny the Elder.

There are two problems with this explanation. First, “grain of salt” was not an established idiom in Pliny’s Rome, so if he was trying to signal skepticism by using the phrase, he was wasting his time. Pliny, Pompey and Mithridates were all apparently dead serious about the poison and salt combo. Secondly, the Latin phrase meaning “with a grain of salt” usually cited as being in Pliny’s account, “cum grano salis,” isn’t actually there. Pliny uses the Classical Latin equivalent “addito salis grano.” The form of “Cum grano salis” is Medieval Latin, which tends to indicate that the story of Pliny’s skepticism as the source of the idiom was cooked up quite a bit after the fact. So the truth is almost certainly that “with a grain (or pinch) of salt” originated sometime in the Middle Ages and always simply referred to making dull food more exciting (or a tall tale easier to swallow) by sprinkling a bit of salt on it.