Monthly Archives: November 2009

teh

lolz. this is teh l33t. im in ur langwidj eating ur wordz. lolspeak: ur doin it rite. all ur teh are belong to us!!111! i can has noms now?

If you don’t grok the above, I suggest you spend several hours on icanhascheezburger.com, after which you will be laughing too hard to care. And then Google leet.

But what is teh? Oh, come on. You’ve typed it a squillion times. Yes, it’s when your left hand follows the t of the with the e before your right hand can get the h in.

“Pshaw! It’s not a word! It’s just a typo!” you object. And this was true for a long time. People have been typing teh for as long as there have been qwerty keyboards, after all. Blame Christopher Sholes, who devised the qwerty layout (which was later modified by Remington) to prevent typewriters from jamming – it moved apart some pairs of letters frequently typed together.

But now, though not in formal English, teh has taken on a special valence and even, in some versions of typed slang, some extra functions. It all proceeds, certainly, from teh being a typo, one typically made when typing quickly or carelessly. From that it can be a mark of a self-consciously “sloppy” or “incorrect” way of typing.

In lolcat speak – the deliberately “incorrect” usages attributed to cats in those funny captioned pictures (as on icanhascheezburger.com) – it displays the imperfect English use that is yet another endearing feature of our furry oral-retentive friends (so focused on getting their noms – meaning food, because when you eat it you go “nom nom nom nom”).

In leet, an in-group type-based argot favoured by those who wish to claim an elite level of tech savvy, it is a winking in-group usage, like pwn (for own, which in this case is a verb meaning “defeat, dominate, perhaps humiliate”) and typing 1 in place of ! and 7 in place of &. (Leet also does other deliberate substitutions, for instance numbers in place of certain letters – leet can be written l33t or even 1337 – and novel morphology, such as xor, an agentive noun suffix that can also be verbed.)

But in leet, teh can also be used to make the following word a superlative adjective without further inflection, even if the word is a verb (ur teh lame would mean “you’re the lamest”; this is teh rock could mean “this really rocks,” although one might more likely see further modifications to make it, for instance, this is teh r0xx0rz). And because of its self-consciousness, it can add extra ostension and possibly irony to the noun it specifies (you’re teh boss).

So teh has become something on the order of ain’t in its effect as a register marker. And because written language always begs for a way to be said – since the spoken form is the primary form of language and the written form’s first purpose is to represent it – it needs a pronunciation. Teh is usually pronounced just as it looks, but generally with the h silent, and perhaps with the vowel reduced so it’s like the but with a voiceless stop rather than a voiced fricative.

This word also has other little overtones and notes that can be found beyond its rather layered usage implications. For one, since it is a rearrangement of the letters of a word, other rearrangements also play in, notably het, which is one of the Dutch equivalents of “the” (the other is de; het can also mean “it”), and eth, not just an archaic inflectional ending (he maketh; he shibboleth; he smiteth) but a long-disused character in English which could, if it were still in use, prevent the typo that gave rise to this word in the first place by allowing us to write the word with it in place of the th (ðe). (Actually, the was formerly written with a thorn (þ), not an eth, and when both of those characters were dropped because they weren’t in the type sets brought over from the continent, thorn was sometimes represented with a y, giving us ye – still pronounced as “the” and usually written with superscript e – for þe, i.e., the.)

And teh also happens to be the Yale transliteration of the Mandarin Chinese word now (in pinyin) written de, as in Dao De Jing, best known in its Wade-Giles version, Tao Te Ching, but in Yale rendered Tao Teh King. And what is this teh? Virtue, also described as strength, power, integrity, etc. If u has virtue, ur not just teh king, ur teh l33t!

book it

Say some guy was a crook, though he didn’t look it, and he saw a chance to steal and took it: when the alarm went off he’d know he had to book it.

Wait, what? Book the alarm? Noooo… Although book it is a term perhaps more often known for use with tickets and other things that need to be reserved, it also has a slang use to refer to rather unreserved haste. “Man, he was bookin’ it around the corner, and he ran right into a cop!” It can also be speed of other activities: “Your essay’s due when? Six hours? Have you written it yet? Dude, you’d better book it!”

It’s an interesting usage, inasumch as books are not always thought of as fast-moving (jacket-flap reviews nothwithstanding). Boot it and boost it have clear senses, and cook it would seem a suitable metaphor (heat = speed); beat it is common enough, and of course move it. But book it? Librarians are known no more for celerity than for celebrity.

But, now, what are all these its? Well, they’re rather like what you might be muttering between breaths as you book it to something you’re late for: they’re expletives. That is to say, they just fill out the sentence. Originally (in the 16th century) there was always some sort of “it” in mind: fight it out meant “fight the matter out.” The out was soon enough dropped and the form became a pattern with an indefinite object. Shakespeare made use of this form several times.

This phrase does have a quick sound; it has the bursting [b] of book and the kick-back of the kit. (Speaking of kick, it’s also very similar to bucket; in northern British dialects, it may be a homophone.) When we look at it, we see the boo, which could be the scare that motivated the flight. The sequential circles of boo may also recall some cartoonish indications of motion. Book is a good old Anglo-Saxon four-letter word (those are so often suited to rushes), and it is even quicker – and thinner, and depersonalizing. No time to be nice! Shakespeare notwithstanding, this form has a colloquial feeling, and of course haste and slang go well together: it is not so dignified to move at top speed, and the use of an obviously casual form can reinforce the need not to stand on ceremony.

Where did this phrase come from? I don’t know; slang can be a prodigious borrower. I’m inclined to guess that it’s a reference to booking a ticket to somewhere. Truly fussy prescriptivists may be jogged to remember that this book is also a verbing, of the type that focuses on the destination of the act, and therefore must be an abomination unto the language (since at least AD 966).

But do people have that in mind when saying it? Most likely not. And I’m inclined to think that any of quite a few words would fit here, and people would still understand the intent. “It’s going to rain; we’ll really have to ___ it back home.” Fill in the blank: not every word will work – short ones are best – and it seems that verbed nouns suit especially well, but you could get away with quite a lot of words. You could practically throw a whole book at it!

shibboleth

There’s a popular beach in the Netherlands called Scheveningen. And dollars to doughnuts if you don’t know Dutch you just read that word wrong. Well, the Dutch are nice, tolerant people. They won’t kill you for it.

Not now they won’t, anyway. Back in World War II they might have – they or the Americans or Brits. The story goes that if a person was trying to pass as Dutch but screwed up the pronunciation of this name, he was assumed to be a German spy, and shot. A little lifesaving phonemics, then: the opening sch is not like “sh” or even like “sk”; in Dutch, the s is [s] and the ch is like the ch in German ach (in the International Phonetic Alphabet this is written [x]). The ng does not have a hard [g] sound at the end of it, and, unlike in German, the v is [v], not [f]. As well, the final n is often dropped. And the accent is on the first syllable.

So why am I talking about Scheveningen when the word we’re tasting is shibboleth? Because Scheveningen was a shibboleth in the narrowest sense: a pronunciation test for group membership, failure of which could have fatal consequences. Here’s the original shibboleth story from the Bible, Judges 12:4–6, in the King James Version (I use it here because it was from this version that the word entered the language; otherwise I would use a translation that was more accurate to current English and more in tune with the scholarship that has happened in the last four centuries):

Then Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead, and fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said, Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites. And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.

My, my: a thin line between elocution and execution! Two voiceless fricatives, one alveolar, the other alveopalatal. Say one and then the other and you can see how close they are. If you think it should be obvious that the one is not the other, consider that Polish, for instance, has two sounds that pretty much both sound like “sh” to anglophones but are easily distinguishable to people who have been making and hearing them all their lives – as easily as we tell “s” from “sh”. But at least if you greet Ryszard or Kasia the wrong way they probably won’t kill you.

Failure to know in-group shibboleths can of course lead to a sort of social death, or exclusion anyway. If you say claret as “cla-ray” rather than “clair-it,” for instance, you may be seen by some oenophiles as a tyro or a poseur, a veritable Florence Bucket. In any in-group, if you don’t know this or that bit of vocabulary, well, you’re marked, possibly without even knowing it – and if you do use it correctly, then it can be your bona fides. Marketers and speechwriters like to use the term dog whistle refer to a phrase that seems unremarkable to most people but has a special reference or effect for a particular group; a dog whistle in this sense is also a shibboleth. And even a certain mode of dress or other distinguishing mark or behaviour – or idea to which one is expected to give allegiance – can, in the broader sense, be a shibboleth.

Does this word have a blunt, brutal sound to you, perhaps like clubbing someone in a cloth sack with a shillelagh? So much the better, since shibboleths can be used as blunt weapons of exclusion in many contexts. And if you think of sabbath, well, some of those exclusions are certainly religiously based. But think, too, of gibberish; many of them are grammatical – we do judge people by the language they use.

It works at different levels in different ways, too. For instance, while ain’t may put you out in the cold in one group, it may be part of a style of speech that proves your credibility in another group. And hypercorrections can play into this as well: some people will think that if you say “between you and me” or “take a picture of my friends and me,” you’re poorly educated. But move a level farther up in knowledge of English, and usage of “between you and I” and “take a picture of my friends and I” is a sure mark of an inferior user. And how often we seem so ready to press the “Smite” button on those who use “bad English”! I’m almost surprised this word didn’t get backformed into a verb when it could: I shibbol, thou shibbolest, he shibboleth. Meaning “test and smite,” I suppose.

By the way, since you’re probably wondering what shibboleth meant: “stream in flood.” It could also have meant “ear of corn,” but since the action took place at a ford, scholars reckon it was the watery sense. To my ears, the word happens to sound also like a rush (or splash) of water, or like walking through ears of corn. But, then, so does sibboleth.

A couple things to know

I just encountered yet another person talking about how “a couple things” (rather than “a couple of things”) is wrong and is a sign of the decline of the English language.

It is true that you do well to be aware that “a couple things” will seem informal or even sloppy to some people. But it is a change in progress (and has been for more than 80 years). And such changes herald not the destruction but the continued vitality of the language. Languages that don’t change are dead.

“A couple” is following a course like “a dozen”: from countable noun to quantifying modifier. Some people insist that “a couple” must take “of,” but you will find that those same people happily and without a second thought use a variety of grammatical structures and usages that at one time or another were innovations. “Dozen” passed through the “of” dropping (except when plural, “dozens”) in the 18th century. “Myriad” can still be used with equal justification as countable noun (“a myriad of reasons”) or as modifier (“a myriad reasons”).

Here’s a general rule of thumb: people who decry certain usages and bemoan the declining state of the language generally have a very limited knowledge of the history of the English language and don’t look things up as much as they should.

cognoscenti

Look at that i sticking up at the end: is it a cog? No, it’s a lone candle. And what do we smell as it burns? Hmmm… one who knows perfumes might detect a scent of the Congo… But among linguistic cognoscenti, it’s obviously an Italian plural ending, the singular word being cognoscente.

Funny thing, though: while it is common enough to turn to individual names for expertise and inside knowledge – in wine, a Robert Parker or a Tony Aspler, say; in fashion, an Anna Wintour or a Jeanne Beker – one rarely ever comes upon a singular cognoscente. No, there’s always a cloud of knowers, that famous in-group: the people who swirl and sniff their wines and can tell you grape and place at a sip, the people who can tell you what’s hot and what’s not and what you must not be caught dead wearing. The cognoscenti.

The most common word to show up near cognoscenti is among: among the cognoscenti, among wine cognoscenti, among fashion cognoscenti, etc. The plural form of the word is an index to a cultural perception. It is not quite that they are the Illuminati, wielding secret power and arcane knowledge (such as how to make a cabal of power-hungry people stay unified for centuries; they usually start killing each other off or having rifts within months), but they are this level of society, this group. No doubt they have their own special terms for things, meaningless or misleading to the uninitiated.

Indeed, I would venture to say that knowledge of the vocabulary and ability to use it appropriately is, well, the shibboleth of the cognoscenti – the Masonic handshake, as it were. I can remember, back before I learned all about figure skating jumps from my wife, being at a party with her skating friends and making a jokey comment that hinged on a Salchow being somehow a harder jump. One of the others in the conversation remarked how people who don’t skate seem always to pick on the Salchow. I was not one of the skating cognoscenti, obviously. (Here’s a tip: the toughest kind of jump that takes off on a backward edge is, for most people, the Lutz; the Axel is harder still just because of its forward take-off and extra half-rotation. I’m not even counting the Walley, because the judges don’t, either.)

And so, too, with wine, fashion, and a variety of other things. It’s not that vocabulary is the only feature, but it is a mark of knowledge. And knowledge is what this is about: Latin cognoscere, “know,” cognate with cognition (but not with cognate!). Cognoscere was classically pronounced “cog no scare, eh,” but in the Italian cognoscenti the cogn is said as in Cognac and the sc as English sh. You will also hear this word said “cog no scent ee”; is saying it thus a mark of not being among the linguistic cognoscenti? Well, perhaps not if you justify it by saying “I was going with the classical Latin style – you know, the plural of cognoscentus.” Most people won’t know you’re BSing. And if you just drop the [g] and say “caw no shent ee,” well, then you’re saying it in modern Italian. So there. But those who don’t know will think you don’t know. Oh, how dreary.

Oh, and those who know, what do they know about? Well, the field perhaps most often mentioned with cognoscenti is fashion. Art is up there too. It must be something refined, right? Except that the game and hoops are also up there, so I guess it gets to slum from time to time. What do you know…

 


Thanks to Elaine Phillips for suggesting this word.

rupestral

“Well, I thought it was clever,” Rupert said. He pursed his lips, stared into his Scotch on the rocks for a moment, and then continued. “And so did she. Certainly at first. I mean, it was too perfect. My name is Rupert Stein and hers is Ani Lithgow. Stein and Lith – the rock theme was on a silver platter, as it were. But I’ll get back to the silver in a moment. I mean, there was silver in the rings, but the silver in the rupiah – oh, well, hm.” He paused and had a drink.

“Rings,” I said, prompting him out of his intermittent funk.

“Yes,” he said, “when I gave her the engagement ring, I had rupestral engraved inside. A nice anagram, Rupert S., A.L. I said as I gave it to her, ‘I’ve taken a lichen to you.'”

He was lucky he’d met a suitably inclined word taster to become affianced to. Abstruse puns aren’t usually thought of as romantic. But he knew that she knew that rupestral meant “growing on rocks,” from Latin rupes “rock.” And because she was a word freak, she would have had the taste of pest in the word but would not have felt it apposite in this case. Or not initially.

“I suppose it had a nice rock on it,” I said.

“Oh, a good stone,” he said. “But a rolling stone gathers no moss, as Ani later pointed out. Anyway, I bought it as a set with the wedding ring, which I also had engraved: rupestrian. Because when you’re married it’s carved in stone. And another great anagram: Rupert S., Ani.”

“Of course, rupestral also means ‘carved in stone’ or ‘written on stone,'” I said.

“Yes,” Rupert said, “they both do. We actually thought of cave paintings as a decorative motif for the wedding.”

“We?” I raised an eyebrow.

“Well,” he said, “perhaps I more than she. Anyway, she thought it would be better to theme with the blue dresses that she was having for the bridesmaids.”

“Blue,” I said. “Aniline die?”

“It was her way of reminding me that two can play the name game.”

“It occurs to me,” I said, “that planning wedding details around puns on your names – especially competing puns – may be –”

He cut me off. “A rocky start? How original of you.” He drank a bit more of his Scotch. The ice clinked. “I mean, obviously we were focused a bit too much on ourselves, I on me, she on her. The name thing was symptom more than cause. But maybe if I had eased it up a bit, not gone the extra step.”

“All this rock punning is a bit much, anyway, given that Rupert has nothing to do with rocks,” I observed.

“Well, it comes from Germanic roots for ‘bright fame’ or ‘famous fame.'” He rolled his eyes. “Not worth the effort. I suppose if I has been given the more standard version of the name, Robert, this might not have come to pass as it did. But it did. And it was really the invitations that were the cause of the rupture.” He paused for a moment and winced.

“I suppose Ani wanted papyrus,” I said.

“Which we agreed on,” he confirmed, “overlooking the fact that the papyrus of Ani was an Egyptian Book of the Dead. I guess there might have been a curse of the mummy. But mainly of her mummy, who didn’t think so highly of me. But it was the seal that sealed my doom.”

“On the invitations?” I said.

“Yes,” he said, “the idea was for the seal to have the impression of a coin in the sealing wax. You know, rupography.”

Yes, as it happened, I did know rupography – taking an impression of a coin or medal in sealing wax. From Greek rhupos “sealing wax” plus the usual ography. “That was a problem?” I asked.

“It was the coin,” he replied. “I guess I should have gone with a rupee, but I didn’t like the pee. So I wanted it to be a rupiah, which is the unit of money of –”

“Indonesia,” I said, nodding. Come on, man, I know that!

“Well, as it happens, the rupiah isn’t worth a whole lot. A hundredth of a cent. You can’t even really get a one-rupiah coin. Which is what I wanted, not 25 or 100 rupiahs or whatever. Anyway, rupiah may, like rupee, come via Urdu from the Sanskrit for ‘wrought silver,’ but their low-value coins are aluminum. So I decided to go to a silversmith and get a fake coin made, with a ring to make it easy to hold. This wasn’t a cheap thing to do, you know.”

I was trying not to say that the money might have been better invested otherwise. Wordplay isn’t just cheap, it’s free, for heaven’s sake.

“So we had the invitations printed up on papyrus. And Ani thought it would be nice to have the seal done with a grey dog on it, which is the family seal of the Lithgows. I suppose I didn’t need to mention to her that ‘grey dog’ was folk etymology and that Lithgow really comes from ‘damp hollow.’ Things got a bit damp and my words began to ring hollow after that…”

“Relations got a bit rupellary?” I said. (Rupellary means “rocky.”)

“Where there were any at all,” he replied, making sure I heard the any–Ani pun. “And then I took it upon myself to seal the invitations all myself, as a surprise to her, with this fake coin. But I hadn’t inspected it closely enough. You may find it hard to believe, but I don’t read backwards print so well. And I just didn’t really stop and look at the seal as I was making it. I really thought they all said rupiah.” He pronounced the [h] at the end clearly.

A pause ensued.

“And when I showed her what I had done, her mother was there too. And her mother is a dermatologist.”

Another pause. I was thinking. Then my eyes grew wide. “Ohhhhh nnoooooooo,” I said.

There’s no delicate way to explain this, really. Rupia – no h – is the name of a nasty skin condition that shows up in advanced syphilis and involves crusted pustules. And what he was telling me was that his invitations had blobs of sealing wax on them stamped with this word.

“At that juncture, Ani pointed out to me that rhupos, aside from meaning ‘sealing wax,’ also means ‘dirt’ or ‘filth.’ And her mother, who doesn’t like puns much, nonetheless indulged in a play on my name and eruption.”

He finished his Scotch and looked over his shoulder towards the bar, the imminent source of his next. He turned back and made one more observation, drily: “Those who are joined by the pun shall be severed by the pun.”

scathe

“Hey, you idiot, what’re you doing with that scythe? Man, you’re lucky you only got a little cut; you could have taken someone’s head off – or your own, which probably wouldn’t make a difference!”

Ooo… a scathing rebuke for one who escaped relatively unscathed from a misadventure.

Now, how is that? If the rebuke is scathing, then the person is scathed, right? Funny, though… the past participle adjective keeps its literal sense even when used consciously as a metaphor, while the present participle adjective is entirely figurative and refers specifically to use of language (speech or writing). We can see these patterns in the collocations: relatively, escape(ed), and emerge(ed) are the most common words coming just before unscathed, while scathing is most often preceded by wrote and issued and followed by report, critique, criticism, review, and letter.

Scathe was first of all a noun, meaning “harm” or “damage” (or, in the misty past, also someone who inflicted same). From there it easily became a verb (as so many nouns have, and yet despite cries of doom and agony from prescriptivist voices our language not only emerges unscathed from these conversions but thrives on them). The verb, in more recent centuries, took on a frequently more specific sense of scorching, blasting, burning, etc.; one may be tempted to imagine some phonaesthetic inclination affecting this, but although scorch and scald have the same onset and flame the same vowel, we must remember that bathe seems to have no such overtones, nor the fairly similar save either, and certainly not, say, lathe. The heat anagram of the rhyme portion of this word also probably had no formative influence on it, though it adds to the flavour now.

But scathing does lend itself to emphatic use, with the extensible lead-in /s/ and the opening-closing arc of the vowel /eI/ with an equally extensible and vibrating voiced fricative after it. Unscathed, for its part, gives a little echo effect when preceded by escaped.

And how does scathe get mixed up in all this? Well, it may be that he-cats (and any she-cat) have a decent supply of lives, but people less so, and even one who cheats death may still have to pick up the dice he cast.

carnage

There is mixed-up anger in this word, following the beginning of calamity. It is what happens when you see rage creeping out of its can. Oh, this word brings to mind a battlefield of senseless slaughter, or else something founded on the same as a metaphor – one’s dining-room table after a particularly successful dinner party, for instance.

It could actually have come to mean one’s dining-room table before a particularly successful dinner party. Its immediate source, French carnage, comes from Italian carnaggio, defined in 1611 as “slaughter, murther; also all manner of flesh meate” (thanks to the OED for that quote). That in turn comes from late Latin carnaticum, meaning “meat” (I would hope that you, as an avid word taster, will recognize the hungry carn root, as seen in carnal – and also carnival and carnation and incarnadine…). Carnaticum also meant specifically “meat supplied by tenants to their feudal lords” (does this make it serf-and-turf?). And Old French charnage could mean “a feast of flesh” or “a day or season when flesh is eaten” (a Catholic church calendar concept). So why not parallel verbiage, a spread of words, with carnage, a spread of meat to eat?

But in modern usage, the meat in question is not for us to eat; to quote the title (English translation) of a book by Anatole France, “the gods will have blood” – and flesh, too. France was referring to the French revolution, which certainly produced carnage of the human kind, but all wars do the same. And then people write songs and poems and novels and make movies about it. Like Robert Burns’s “Battle of Sherra-Moor”:

The red-coat lads wi black cockauds,
To meet them were na slaw, man;
They rush’d and push’d, and bluid outgush’d,
And monie a bouk did fa’, man!
The great Argyle led on his files,
I wat they glanc’d for twenty miles;
They hough’d the clans like nine-pin kyles,
They hack’d and hash’d, while braid-swords clashed,
And thro they dash’d, and hew’d and smash’d,
Till fey men died awa, man.

In more recent usage, Iraq and Bosnia come up commonly in connection with carnage. The most common collocation is actually amid the carnage; one will also often see among the carnage, though purists will protest that among requires individuals, whereas carnage is a mass noun. (Mass carnage also shows up, but not quite as commonly.) The phrase scene of carnage is common, too, and here’s a warning: if you see this phrase, you are likely next to see a description of the scene in question. Other words often seen near it are witnessed and, alas, continues.

But if you go to clusty.com, which clusters search results by themes, the top theme – with the most results – is game. I’m really not sure if that’s good or bad.

 


Thanks to David Moody for suggesting today’s word.

bombinate

I was not in London during World War II; I was born two dozen years later, in Canada. But I have heard and read about what it was like there and then, under aerial assault by the Germans. One of the more striking things mentioned was the buzz bomb. It was an early cruise missile, propeller driven, with an odometer that triggered an aerodynamic jam when its destination had been reached, forcing it into a steep dive. The steep dive caused fuel flow to the engine to stop (not vice versa, as is often thought). The effect from ground level was that the buzzing of the engine was audible, and everyone hoped it would keep buzzing, but if it stopped, then the next thing was a dreadful silence, and then an explosion.

This is what bombinate makes me think of. Bombinate does not mean “bomb” noun or verb, however; it is the noise the buzz bombs made before the engine cut out. It is also the hum of a bumblebee. And one might use it to characterize the sound of the bombard, a reed instrument – bombard does mean “buzzer,” after all. Yes, bombard also means a stone-throwing engine, and from that it means the act of using such an engine; the engine got its name because Latin bombus could also mean “boom” (boom is related to bombus, too) or “hum.” Bombard does not come from bomb; it’s actually been in English longer, in fact. But bomb comes from the noise that bombs make – the booming, not the buzzing. And bombinate, for its part, does not seem to buzz at all, not to my ears; hum, even boom, but not buzz. Well, it can mean “drone” or “hum” as well. But there it is. The bombus is innate in it, innit?

Bombinate is actually based on a bit of dodgy Latin; the proper Latin for the same thing was bombitare, but Rabelais wrote, in a satire of subtle scholarly distinctions, about “Questio subtilissima, utrum chimera in vacuo bombinans possit comedere secundas intentiones”: the very subtle question of whether a chimera bombinating in a vacuum is able to eat second intentions. I suppose the answer is that colourless green ideas sleep furiously. But we do have some sense, at least, of the vast number of second intentions a bombinating bomb could consume in a silent instant in London.


My thanks to Elaine Phillips for suggesting this word.

 

tritone

If you picture the devil, he’s holding a trident; but if his pitchfork is a tuning fork, it is sure to produce a tritone. It’s a trying tone, the tritone, and not a typically trite one; most people would rather try not to intone it. Even Triton, the merman messenger of the deep, who blew a terrible sound on a conch, would not fancy it (it’s more of a dry tone) – and that other Merman, Ethel, would have been no less cagey about it. The only ones producing the interval would be the sirens. I don’t mean the famous singing sisters, either: I mean the two-note alerts on emergency vehicles in places such as England. Walk over to your piano (or someone else’s) and play B and F. You will likely find it neither good nor rich.

But why is it a tritone? Is it really tri plus tone? Yes, it is. It is a difference of three whole tones (six semitones). In the C major scale, the fourth (i.e., the fourth note counting upwards, with C as the first) is F, and the fifth is G. Now, if you start at F instead of C, the fifth is C – a fifth and a fourth make up an octave. But F# (F-sharp) is the tritone of C and vice-versa: there are twelve semitones in an octave, so six is halfway, and two tritones make an octave. So why doesn’t it produce a nice harmony? Because the frequencies increase logarithmically: each semitone is 1.06 times the frequency of the previous, and so the frequency 50% higher – which does make a nice harmony – is actually seven semitones up, the fifth, for example from C to G. And the tritone is so not it. It is a diminished fifth – or an augmented fourth.

The tritone has a mythos such that if you ask a musician about the it, they will be sure to mention directly that it’s the “diabolus in musica,” the devil in music. Stories abound about its being anathematized in medieval times, singers who dare voice it risking excommunication, but these are mere stories; the dissonance was disliked for obvious enough reasons, but the term “diabolus in musica” is only attested starting in the eighteenth century. And by the middle of the twentieth century, this archetypal dissonance was being used thematically in classical music – it’s central to Benjamin Britten’s War Requiem, for instance.

But the tritone is also a central note to “the devil’s music” – blues, which were, incidentally, the original basis for heavy metal music (which, however, has moved quite some ways away from blues in the intervening decades). In the hexatonic scale of the blues, it is the pivotal note, and it is called the “blue note.” Which is not to say it runs afoul of blue laws. But be wary of it if liquor is restricted – you don’t want to be caught with a diminished fifth.