Monthly Archives: March 2013

at the end of the day

“At the end of the day,” the guy with the orange polyster tie said, “we’re all about value here. Value and quality.”

Maury looked skeptical. This was his first time buying a new car (after all these years), but he had heard stories. “Does it get good gas mileage? All things considered?”

“Well, you know, you drive some in the city, you drive some in the country, but a car you get from us, at the end of the day, it’s going to be economical with the gas.” He leaned his torso in its checked jacket against a counter and took a slug of his coffee.

“What is the service record like, in the long run?”

“I’m telling you, at the end of the day, the cars we sell have better service records than any other make.” He paused, then nodded once for emphasis.

“And yet you’re selling the extra protection warranty. In the final analysis, is that such a good deal, then?” Maury circled the car one more time, running his finger along the detailing.

“You know, if it were just you and the car…” The salesman made a flat wipe with his hand. “You wouldn’t need it. But there are other drivers out there, and nature. Rocks. Ice. At the end of the day, that warranty is a good deal.”

Maury raised an eyebrow and he and I exchanged a glance. This salesman sure was focused on the end of the day. I was wondering if he was impatient to go home. I glanced at the clock: still just early afternoon. Well, people do tend to speak in habitual manners, and fads come and go for clichés. At the end of the day has been in use in its figurative sense at least since the 1970s – but it didn’t take long for the Oxford English Dictionary to include “hackneyed” as part of its definition.

“The handling in difficult conditions?” Maury asked. He opened the driver’s door and sat on the side of the seat.

“At the end of the day,” salesdude said, one arm holding coffee cup leaning against the door frame, “any car you get from us will handle better than any other one you can get.”

“So, in sum, all in all, when all is said and done…” Maury said.

“At the end of the day?”

“Sub specie aeternitatis?” Maury said. The salesman looked at him blankly. “When it comes down to it, is it really the best one for me? Or should I look at a few more?”

“At the end of the day, you won’t find another car that’s better for your needs.”

“And are you really, when it’s all added up, giving me the best deal you can? Are there other plans, other promotions, other incentives –”

“At the end of the day, no.” Salesmeister swept his hands apart smartly. “You won’t come out further ahead than what I’m offering you.”

Maury paused a moment. “Very well, then…”

I didn’t think I could trust the salesman as far as I could throw him. But Maury clearly liked the car, and he was just seeking assurances. The salesman seemed confident and forthright enough to him.

Looking back, though, one thing is clear to us: Maury should have come back in the evening, just before closing. The car Maury bought that afternoon turned out to be a lemon and an open sore on his bank account. Everything the salesman said may have been true… but we’ll never know, because it wasn’t the end of the day.

captious

As you wander through word country, as you pick and serve your delicacies of syntax and lexis, keep an eye open for the snares. There is a subset of the word country population who are there not to nurture and relish but to hunt, trap, capture. They are the catchers, the captors, the cacciatori. They are the captious.

Captious, because they set snares and seize on any small fault they can find. For them, the language is already too capacious and needs to be more rapacious. They have self-printed hunting licences declaring open season at all times. They forge on them the signatures of authorities, but in truth there is no central office, for the language is a common creation, cultivated by all. The jackbooted brigades that these trappers would like to call forth are not to be found; there is only this infestation of the captious, individuals with apparent common cause but in actual disagreement on many points, and their thirst to cavil outweighs their understanding of the subject. True understanding can be gained only by tending and nurturing, not by darting raids on the eggs and seedlings.

There is no fault too small for the captious. Nor need the fault be real: these cacciatore chickens play by invented rules, snaring and bagging on the pretext of imaginary laws that were confected only to give a smirking justification for hanging the language to drain its blood. Hanging from what? Flimsy scaffolds that they pretend are living syntax trees.

You can see them in the wild, scratching out captions and imposing Sharpies on apostrophes. Online you will find even more: the screen captious are the horseflies of cyberspace, buzzing and stinging between the tweets. Today has likely been an extra busy day, as it has been Grammar Day. Imagine: a groaning buffet table of the best and most beautiful of language, set out for all to take, but beset at the edges by the captious, who fling food to the floor, measure distances between dishes, set mousetraps beneath the fruits and cheeses, brandish bodkins at would-be diners. The gastronomy becomes an occasion of paranoia and competition. The gardeners and chefs of words must set out their defences and swat away the parasites.

But while we do not welcome the captious, beleaguerers of words and of word-lovers, we do welcome captious. It is a good word from a decent family with many close resemblances. From the progenitor capere ‘take, hold’ come capture, catch, caption, cacciatore (Italian for ‘hunter’), captor, and captious, among others, as well as cousins such as capable. This crisp word, captious, snaps like a trap or the clap and echo of a gunshot. It is well used to say ‘inclined to find fault on whatever pretext, to entrap’.

When you encounter the captious, as you inevitably will, counsel them: Do not be so captious. And when they start ringing ropes around you on the basis that there must be standards, and unitary enforced standards at that, ask them to start by setting and exemplifying standards for good manners, respectfulness, maturity, and thoughtfulness.

anathema

The first thing to know about this word is that the stress is on the second syllable, and the th is voiceless. It thus sounds very much like the first four syllables of a mathematician.

When I look at it, it appears to me rather like a broad building with columns in its façade and a peaked roof just in the middle – not a clerestory; more like a low steeple, perhaps.

But then I notice the article right in the middle: the. And then I notice the articles in the beginning: an, a. It has all three articles stacked up, followed by ma, which might be a mother or might be the Mandarin particle indicating a question: so it could be an – a – the – ma, speaking of an, no, a, no, the mother; or it could be an, a, the ma? – i.e., asking if it’s an, a, or the.

Small wonder that there might be confusion. This word is in fact typically anarthrous. That is to say, it usually takes no article. It is treated as a mass object. Like garbage, junk, trash, etc.: “Such ideas are anathema to us.” And it can refer to a thing or idea, or to a person (“Such a person is anathema”), or to the act of declaring that the thing or person is anathema – in this last sense, it is countable: “He pronounced an anathema.”

Who or what would be anathema? Most classically, a heretic meriting excommunication. If you look in the Canons of the Council of Trent, you will find that, for instance, anyone who objects to the mass is to be anathema, and of course it follows that objections to the mass are also anathema. I am tempted to say that this is why anathema is a mass object.

But actually the canon law formula, stated quite tidily by Jimmy Akin as “If anyone says . . . <INSERT SOME AWFUL HERESY HERE> . . . let him be anathema,” imports a Greek word into the Latin. That “let him be anathema” is, in Latin, anathema sit (the sit is the third-person singular subjunctive and is used for a third-person imperative, and is gender-neutral), but that word anathema is taken undigested from Greek. It’s sort of like how we borrow food terms from other languages and handle them with kid gloves. “If anything be pickled vegetables cut in small dice and mixed with a small amount of light sauce, let it be antipasto.” The Greek phrase that anathema sit translates is ἀνάθεμα ἔστω, anathema esto. So we have an English word borrowed directly from Latin, which borrowed it directly from Greek, and Latin preserved the Greek phrasing undigested, and English preserved the lack of article from the Latin (although Latin used articles less often than English does).

And where does that Greek phrase come from? The apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians, first chapter, eighth verse: ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται [ὑμῖν] παρ’ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Which means, “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned” (that’s the New International Version translation).

So that’s what anathema means? It would be accurate to say it means ‘accursed’ or ‘consigned to damnation’ or ‘excommunicated’ (Jimmy Akin explains helpfully that anathema sit in canon law does not automatically excommunicate a person; the person must be formally excommunicated in a rather solemn ceremony involving candles being thrown onto the floor, and the person can be formally reconciled if he or she recants – but also, it isn’t in use at all anymore; it was abolished in 1983). In more general use, it tends to mean ‘utterly unacceptable’: “Although Comic Sans is anathema to most graphic designers, the commemorative album for Benedict XVI posted by the Vatican is done entirely in that very font.”

In its sense, then, anathema is a nasty word, and in common usage it is typically constrained into a particular phrasing: X is anathema to Y. It looks like an adjective, and yet dictionaries tell us it is a noun. I suspect that in the minds of many users it is actually an adjective, but that’s not the official edict. One must take it as an article of faith that it faithfully has no article.

Its origin is not actually nasty. The Greek word ἀνάθεμα does mean ‘an accursed thing’, but it comes to that as ‘a thing devoted to evil’, and that is because in origin it just means ‘a thing devoted’ – that is to say, ‘a thing set up’ (up to the gods). The ana is the same as in anagram and anachronism (it means ‘up’) and the thema comes ultimately from the verb τιθέναι tithenai ‘put, set, place’ (and yes, it is related to our word theme). So somehow from ‘set up’ it has come to mean a version of ‘sent down’.

I think Anathema would make a good name for a heavy metal group (I do not mean like actinide and lanthanide). And in fact there is a band of that name who formerly fit into the doom and death metal genres, but now play music that is more in the alternative and progressive genres. Which is kind of funny, because some of the songs they’re playing now would be anathema to many death metal fans. (I leave it to you to YouTube them or not.)

But how does the word feel to you? Iva Cheung, who suggested tasting this word and who has posted a cartoon about it on her blog, finds that the open vowels and the reminiscence of the pattern in ethereal make the word more pleasant in form than in sense. I find that it has a taste of anthem, which has a positive solemnity to it, but I find also that under the influence of its sense the word seems to hiss like a fork-tongued demonic creature – funny how nasty a sound can seem to be if you wish to hear it in that light. The sounds are all so soft, but the sentence so harsh: like the rustling of silk as a robed hand is raised to point to the door through which a person is to be ejected.

Such a contradictory word. And such a word of contradiction and malediction. But your judgement of its flavour is entirely up to you: you are the anathematician.