Tag Archives: word tasting notes

sofa, couch

Dear word sommelier: I notice that in your note on chesterfield you used sofa and couch interchangeably. Isn’t there a difference?

Of course there’s a difference. Sofa has two syllables and four letters and is soft, with just two voiceless fricatives at the front of the mouth and a round vowel (“ohhhh” like a sound you might make sinking into a plush sofa), and it has overtones of sol-fa and soda and perhaps Sufi and suffer and so far and shofar and maybe even loofahCouch, on the other hand, has one less syllable and one more letter, but just three phonemes – of which two are compound: a diphthong and an affricate. It is a harder word, to be sure, with its voiceless stop onset and its voiceless affricate ending. But somehow that doesn’t seem to bother the people who sit on couches – not even the echo of ouch or the taste of crunch and catch and cow and crutch…

Words are, as I have said many times, known by the company they keep. But these two words actually have very similar collocations – here’s what wordandphrase.info gives for them: sofa: adj asleep, comfortable, sectional, plush, living-room, Victorian, sagging, convertible; noun chair, room, table, living, cushion, leather, bed, back, arm, pillow; verb sit, lie, sleep, watch, lay, fall, lean, settle, seat, face; couch: adj asleep, comfortable, living-room, comfy, overstuffed, lumpy, sagging, upholstered; noun room, potato, chair, living, leather, back, arm, cushion, TV, bed; verb sit, sleep, lie, lay, fall, settle, lean, seat, face, sprawl.

Mind you, they do keep some different company socially. You can’t draw a nice isogloss for them – a line on a map that shows roughly where people stop using one word and start using the other, like with soda and pop (and, in the southern US, generic coke). The divider, inasmuch as there is one, is more one of social set. People whose lives are softer seem to like sofa better. If you see the play Six Degrees of Separation by John Guare (or watch the movie made from it, starring Will Smith, Donald Sutherland, and Stockard Channing), you will see a scene in which a rich kid who went to prep schools is teaching a poor black kid how to fit into the rich social set, and one point he makes is that the piece of furniture is not a couch, it’s a sofa.

Not that it’s as tidy as that. Many people use both, depending on context or whim, even if they prefer one to the other (usually couch to sofa). If they want to emphasize the softness or sound somehow more high-class, they might go with sofa. Or they might associate one word or another with some particular person or social set from their own lives. Each word is couched differently for each person.

Oh, yes, couch has a verb, too, which sofa does not. In fact, it has a much wider set of uses, noun and verb. It shows up in many contexts where something is lying or set together or into another thing. Which is reasonable enough, given its etymology. You very likely know that French se coucher means “go to bed” or “lie down”. A couch is not simply something you sit on; it’s something you can lie on – like the psychoanalyst’s couch, not sofa. So you see that there are these extra little collocations that show up farther back.

Oh, yeah: that’s where the French coucher comes from, by the way. Latin collocare. Meaning “put in its proper place” or “lay with” (not “lie with” – that comes with the French).

And sofa? It comes from Arabic. You may have seen, in real life or in pictures, an Arabic room furnished with a low platform on which is laid a carpet or carpets and various cushions for sitting or reclining on. That is what Arabic ṣoffah refers to, that platform and its cushy furnishings.

And the different denotations? Don’t they refer to different things? Well, the analyst’s couch has only a half back and one arm (or head end), and that matches a particular type that can be distinguished from a sofa with its full back and arms. But in actual common usage, especially in North America, one simply can’t draw a neat distinction, not even a fuzzy-bordered distinction like between cup and mug. You just have to go by feel and whim. You know what effect you would get by saying sofa potato instead of couch potato; go from there.

chesterfield

In this dream, you are named Chester. You are in a field near Chesterfield, wearing a Chesterfield, sitting on a chesterfield, smoking a Chesterfield, listening to The Chesterfields. A Roman army is camped nearby. You look over to the town. The steeple of its church is twisted around and leaning towards you, as if looking over its shoulder at you.

It all started with the Roman army, really. Their encampment: castra, Old English ceaster. Near it, a field. Ceasterfeld. Eventually Chesterfield. The town – near Sheffield – with its church dating to the 14th century, Saint Mary and All Saints, with that famous spire, twisted and leaning. There are many folk tales as to how the spire got that way. A local blacksmith mis-shod the devil, who leapt over the spire in pain and made it crooked. Or it bent over in curiosity when it heard a virgin was to be wed in the chuch, and will straighten up when one is. Or, or. In reality, mistakes were made by builders and roofers.

Chesterfield has had earls. The fourth Earl of Chesterfield, Philip Stanhope (1694–1773), was a noted statesman and man of letters. He also, incidentally, commissioned a piece of furniture: a sofa with a squared back and arms of equal height, plush, with buttons deeply upholstered onto it, and upholstry often of leather. A Chesterfield sofa. In Canada, for quite some time, any sofa – any couch – was called a chesterfield. That usage is dying out now; the Canadian linguist Jack Chambers studied it 20 years ago and found a clear age grading. But for many Canadians, me included, the first thing they think of even still when hearing chesterfield is a couch.

Philip Stanhope was also popular in the colonies, at least until they rebelled. There are several Chesterfield places named after him in America. One is in Virginia, Chesterfield County. They grow tobacco there. A brand of cigarette, once quite popular but seldom seen these days (especially in America; it can still be seen in Europe), is named after the county. You would be well advised to avoid smoking a Chesterfield on a chesterfield, as the embers may land and burn in and smolder, leading to a fire. Perhaps this is why the steeple is canting towards you.

The sixth Earl of Chesterfield, George Stanhope, also made something popular, a bit of upholstry, as it were: a coat for men. Around 1860, he decided that he had had enough with the fitted coats of the time, made for wearing indoors and out; he took to a less shaped version, a straighter coat with lapels and buttons (single or double breast), that was meant to be doffed when one was indoors. The Chesterfield coat. You may well have one without knowing it. I have one hanging in my closet.

The Chesterfields, for their part, were a British indie rock band of the mid- to late-1980s. I should tell you that they came from Somerset. They came out with a number of songs that will be liked by the same people who like The Smiths. “Goodbye Goodbye.” “Nose Out of Joint.” If I were you, I would be listening to “Ask Johnny Dee” while reclining on that rural sofa smoking.

And I would be thinking about that word: chesterfield. Three syllables, like the three cushions of a chesterfield. All consonants are voiceless or liquid, except for that last voiced stop /d/. An affricate to start with, then a fricative plus stop – the reverse of an affricate. After the liquid /r/, another fricative to move the sound from tongue-tip to lips. But it goes back to the tongue-tip after that. It is soft for the most part, like cushions or ashes or perhaps a long coat, but with a bit of crispness.

And there is a contrast between the expansive feeling of field, the images we get of open plains, and the solidity of chest, like your chest which you may smite through your coat, or a chest of drawers, or a treasure chest.

Yes. You snuff your Chesterfield and toss your Chesterfield on the chesterfield. The treasure chest must be buried here, in the field near Chesterfield. You had gone all the way to the Chesterfield Islands in the Coral Sea looking for it, but, though you felt you were following Philip Stanhope’s advice, “The world is a country which nobody ever yet knew by description; one must travel through it one’s self to be acquainted with it,” you now realize the treasure is at the source, a place much less exotic. No doubt this is why the Romans are here, these thousand soldiers – mille milites.

Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, in Nunavut, Canada, a chest lies buried in the permafrost at Igluligaarjuk – also known as Chesterfield Inlet. You will wake before you get there.

quondam

How fitting that I set to tasting this word just after reading a brief article on obscure quaint imported liquors and the ever-so-arcane-and-cute cocktails one may make with them. This word is a Sazerac served on the marble counter of your prose – or a brooklyn cocktail made with coyly copied Picon, or an old-style martini: two parts gin, one part dry vermouth, half a part sweet vermouth, and a dash of Angostura. It is a sometime word for “sometime”, an erstwhile or whilom usage for “erstwhile” or “whilom”, a former way of saying “former”.

Never mind why we have all those words that denote pretty much the same thing. Listen, I have six bottles of different kinds of Scotch in my liquor cabinet. I have three different kinds of gin in various places around the suite (freezer, cabinet). I have five kinds of rum, four kinds of brandy; for heaven’s sake, I have two kinds of cachaça. Some people even keep several different kinds of vodka. For much the same reason, I see no issue with keeping sometime, erstwhile, whilom, former, and quondam in the lexis cabinet.

Each one has its own sounds, of course, with their associations: two have the grey whiskers of whil, of which one has the Teutonic greying temples of erst and the other smokes the meerschaum of om; one is a common word elevated to pretension by the docking of an s from the tail; one is really quite common; and then there is the one with that quirky-yet-recondite pure Latin qu formation. Quondam. It smacks of Gregorian chant, and yet it also rather sounds like a Brooklyn prophylactic, doesn’t it? Add to that the clowns and acrobats of Quidam, at least for those who like Cirque du Soleil.

These several words, like all words, are also known by the company they keep. Quondam, perhaps more even than any of the others in the set (with the possible exception of whilom), sets a particular tone, a register, an air; it tells you something about the person using the word. If the user is male, you may reasonably expect that he owns real bowties and knows how to tie them, and can tell the difference between a tuxedo (black tie) and tails (white tie) and knows when to wear each. A woman who uses this word is surely not an utter stranger to elbow-length white silk gloves, nor to the arched eyebrow and arch comment – delivered not over tea or even juleps but something a little stronger, if you don’t mind, and another after that.

Roberto De Vido has drawn my attention to its use in a letter (quoted in The New Yorker) by none other than the great New York acid wit of round table and reviews, Alexander Woollcott:

To me you are no longer a faithless friend. To me you are dead. Hoping and believing I will soon be the same, I remain

Your quondam crony,

A. Woollcott

There’s a shot of bitters for you! But the words live on.

Indeed, anyone who uses it now may be assumed to be aspiring or pretending to a status of erudite wit, whatever their topic. It may even be used for contrast, as in this quote from a 2006 National Post article: “The future of ‘Hart House’, quondam home of the first family of professional wrestling, was secured by a new development plan.”

Ah, yes. House. That’s actually a less common usage. One further detail is that quondam is used more often of people. One not so often will hear of “my quondam domicile”; much more likely “my quondam domestic partner.” It was in its oldest English usages (and still is, occasionally) a noun meaning “former holder of an office or position” (as the OED says). It can also be an adverb, which is what it was in Latin – meaning “formerly”, of course.

Well, enough for this evening. The weekend awaits. As does a bedtime cocktail… with, let us say, Cointreau and Zuidam gin? Ah, I’ve finished the latter (sometime since, in fact). Well, there’s my quondam cocktail, then: Cointreau and – damn, I’ll have to use the Magellan gin. And a little whisper of Becherovka, for the requisite bitters.

mortadella

“What’s this?” Edgar Frick held up a pink cube of some kind of comestible.

His better half, Marilyn, glanced over. “I’m pink, therefore I’m ham.”

Maury, who – as often – was bustling about setting up the food for this month’s Words, Wines, and Whatever tasting, stopped long enough to say “Mortadella.” Then he continued setting foodstuffs out.

“Baloney,” Edgar said, and popped it into his mouth.

“Not exactly,” said Maury over his shoulder as he bustled about. “Bologna – or baloney – is an American version of mortadella, but this is the real thing. From Bologna. The city.”

“No,” said Edgar, “mortadella is a great big pink slice. Like this.” He gestured with his hands. “In fact, an end of a mortadella looks pretty much like –” he reached over towards his better half, in particular a rounder part of her anatomy, but she swatted his hand away. “Hm!” he said. “Cruella!”

“It’ll be the morta della you,” she said, more leering than indignant. Then, to Maury, “Isn’t that what mortadella means? ‘Death of the’? Death of the what? Do they know?” She looked skeptically at the white stuff dotting the pink mass.

“That would be morte della,” I volunteered. “Or morte dello, or del, or delle, or degli, or dei.”

“Well, I’m still wondering what fell into the sausage grinder,” she said, impaling the cube on an inch-long vampire-red little fingernail. She waggled it at Edgar and then ate it as though she were doing a community theatre version of Tom Jones.

“The white lumps are pork fat,” Maury said from partway across the room. “It is also seasoned with black pepper and myrtle.”

“Myrtle!” Marilyn exclaimed. “That was my aunt’s name. I always wondered what happened to her…”

“So it’s myrtle-della,” Edgar said, and found it not beneath him to eat another cube.

Maury’s orbit drew him nearer again. “It’s thought that the name mortadella comes from Latin murtatum, meaning ‘seasoned with myrtle berries’, and a diminutive ending ella.”

“Ella was my other aunt,” Marilyn said. “Her ending was not diminutive. If you think mine is something to see…” She edged her leather-cased rotund end towards Maury, who quickly jumped over to the next table.

“Perhaps this is morte di Ella,” I suggested, spearing a cube with a toothpick.

“It has also, on the other hand,” Maury said, “been long held that the name comes from mortaio, referring to the mortar in which the meat was pounded.”

Marilyn cocked her head at Maury and raised a leering eyebrow. Maury sighed, realizing his unintended double entendre, and drew further away.

“It’s a big-sounding word,” I said, trying unsuccessfully to divert the conversation from its downward trend. “I mean, four syllables, that rather big back round effect on ‘mort’, uh… Della could be a name of someone big, though it could also be small…”

“But really,” Edgar said, eating yet another cube, “mort a deli ever serve it this way?”

“In the orbit of Bologna,” Maury said, trying to remain in the conversation without getting too close to Marilyn’s centre of gravity, “it is often served this way at the beginning of a meal, with rustic bread.”

“So where’s the bread?” I asked.

“I was just about to bring it out,” he said.

Marilyn stepped forward and reached her hands towards Maury, rolling the fingers in the air in her best vampirella fashion. Impaled on her nails were the last ten cubes of the mortadella. “Just bring your buns here, dear boy,” she purred.

Maury stepped back. “You will be the death of me,” he croaked, and disappeared into the kitchen.

Marilyn shrugged and proffered her digits to me and Edgar. “Finger food?”

ecchymotic

You want an author with a taste for the words of the English language and how they fit together? I recommend Vladimir Nabokov.

Yes, Nabokov, that great nabob of books, who grew up in Russia – though he could write English before he could Russian. Nabokov, author of Lolita, which, aside from treating a topic that is still shocking today (and incidentally providing a useful eponym to certain kinds of classified ads and websites), opens with a little word tasting on Lolita. (I’m not going to quote it here. Go read it, for heaven’s sake.) A man whose prodigious vocabulary was matched by an ability to string these marvellous ingredients together into some of the most sapid sentences ever set in type. He truly squeezes the juice out of words to make the ink of his page.

It is in a work of his that I confess I have yet to read that you will find today’s word. I was talking with a fellow regular passenger on the bus recently, a school teacher, and she was reading his book Speak, Memory, in which he described his governess’s hands thus (you can read a longer quote at the blog Riverside Rambles):

In our childhood we know a lot about hands since they live and hover at the level of our stature; Mademoiselle’s were unpleasant because of the froggy gloss on their tight skin besprinkled with brown ecchymotic spots.

I want you to read that whole sentence out loud. Do it carefully. Savour the words. Read it out again. Find the sound patterns and the rhythms. The sounds feed forward and back like sephiroth: live – hover – level – stature; froggy gloss versus tight skin; not sprinkled but, for rhythm and to foreshadow brown, besprinkled; the echo in ecchymotic spots; the rhythm of that whole last clause: Mademoiselle’s were unpleasant because of the froggy gloss on their tight skin besprinkled with brown ecchymotic spots. You see? It holds a three-beat rhythm that it interrupts at the most important parts with a shorter, punchier cut rhythm. (I cannot resist suggesting that Nabokov may have been extra sensitive to rhythms since the Anglophone world is full of people who say his name with the wrong one – it’s really Vladimir Nabokov [with the final v said “f”], not Vladimir Nabokov.)

In all that, there is really just one word that most readers will not know. They can tell from context what it must mean – and just as the spots are icky or yecchy, the word, too, is the yecchiest, stickiest one there, and it has a sort of unappealing peeling ugliness. The cc is like eczematous scales (though ecchymosis is not eczema); its heart holds most of chyme (related, as we will see, though stomach juices are not involved here) and mote (though an ecchymosis is not quite that either). It starts with ec and ends with tic – but while the usage of language here may be ecstatic, there is nothing ecstatic about ecchymosis. Nor, in spite of the rhymes, anything erotic or psychotic. Exotic, perhaps.

But if you want to squeeze the juice out of this word, well, you have an etymological basis. Ecchymotic is formed from its noun ecchymosis, which comes from Greek ἐκ ek “out” plus χυμός khumos “juice” – the Greek verb ἐκχυμοῦσθαι ekkhumousthai meant “let or force out blood”.

Which means that the spots on the hands of this governess, Mademoiselle O, were not liver spots or freckles; they were hematomas, or at least something caused by the rupture of capillaries. Nabokov was fluent in French – indeed, he learned it at the hand of Mademoiselle O – so he certainly will have known the French word ecchymose, which means “bruise”. Which is what ecchymosis generally is. It’s something caused by ruptured blood vessels under the skin (but a larger spot than you get with petechia), and that’s going to be a bruise as a rule. The blood pools into the tissue, phagocytes and macrophages eat the red cells, and the ruddy hemoglobin is converted to bilirubin, which is blue-green; that is then converted to hemosiderin, which is brown. And the process is converted into the word bruise, which is typically black and blue, or the word ecchymosis, which is purple.

Nabokov will also have known very well the common French word for ecchymosis: bleu. A bruise is a “blue”. Now read again what he wrote: brown ecchymotic spots. So these were not fresh bruises; they were blood that was long pooled there. I am inclined to suspect that these were really telangiectasias, little spider veins, that had burst. Manual aneurysms. But there’s more to writing a good sentence than just choosing the most clinically correct word. If you want to construct a succubus of prose, ready to seduce your reader, you must feel the flow of the sounds. It is not that your prose must be immaculate; it is that it must have the spots in all the right places.

I should mention, as a postscript, that I showed the school teacher – a woman named Reet of Estonian extraction – my book, Songs of Love and Grammar, and she bought a copy. And, oh! By the way! It’s now available on Amazon.com – though if you can get it through Lulu.com, that’s better.

thoroughfare

There is a Fairmont not too far from where I live (two blocks), and the other day I noticed a sign in front of its unloading area advising motorists that there was no throughfare.

Now, tell me: haven’t you always thought that throughfare seemed more sensible than thoroughfare? I mean, it’s a through road, not a thorough road, right? Have you perhaps once or more questioned yourself as to whether you even remembered correctly which it was?

And, by the way, why are we talking about fares when it’s a road, not something you pay to ride? Shouldn’t throughfare be the money you pay to go all the way through to somewhere?

Well, those are all fare, I mean fair, questions, and they deserve a reasonably thorough answer.

Let’s start with the fact that through and thorough used to be the same word. Old English had a few variations on some words, and the word þurh got a version that had an extra vowel added to make þuruh (that letter þ is a thorn, the way “th” used to be written; for more on how English used to be, see “An Appreciation of English: A language in motion” and “What’s up with English spelling?”). Other words that got this epenthetic vowel include burrow, furrow, borrow, sorrow, and marrow. As for the one-syllable version, it swapped the two middle sounds around and then let go of the velar fricative at the end (though we still write it: gh).

So through and thorough are from the same? Yes: to go through is to go all the way, from side to side or end to end; to be thorough is to do something all the way, from side to side or end to end. In fact, thorough has a solid history of use as a preposition and adverb quite in parallel to through; you could still see it as such in an 1847 poem by Ralph Waldo Emerson: “Thorough a thousand voices Spoke the universal dame.”

But now, in the age of thru, we have no thurro or anything like that. But we still have that old fixed form thoroughfare on our lexical bill of fare.

Ah, yes, fare. Cognate with German fahren – indeed, thoroughfare in German is Durchfahrt, which is thoroughly cognate (cognate through and through). Originally a reference to a road or way or journey; then a passage or conveyance (and there’s the verb, as in How are you faring?); then the price for the passage; then there was the mode of proceeding, and on the basis of that a list of a food to be provided – as in bill of fare.

So there. And we need go no further for now. We can content ourselves with tasting the sounds of this word: it is soft, with its voiceless fricatives like wind siffling and soughing in the heather. As thoroughfare, it requires no pursing of the lips as throughfare would; it has that extra fractional syllable, almost just a lengthening of the /r/ in many cases, that gives it a bit more rhythm and length. Thoroughfare is more like the sound and sway of a night trip on train or bus, whereas throughfare would be more like an arrow or two, or some rapid means of conveyance (bullet train or air), with its one-two swing and whiffle.

Either way, it’s a long word, with (ugh) three orthographic unphonological (silent) letters in the middle and another at the end. Its heart is rough, but it doesn’t give you a rough ride. But let us address that Fairmont question: can you spell it – and say it – throughfare?

Well, I mean, you can, but will people look at it and think “That’s wrong”? Will it in fact be wrong?

The answer is that it has been spelled that way at times in the past. And I would not at all be surprised, especially now that thorough meaning “through” is not used, if in the future it came to be that normally. But in the here and now, I’ll just say it’s not in the dictionary as such. I think that’s thorough and fair.

riffle

The brook that licks the roots of the syntax trees growing on the monadnock in the heart of word country is a variable stream. As it reaches the plain, it meanders, makes oxbows, in some places fills pools – here limpid, there turbid – but in others really books it, like the fluvial version of a page-turner. Sit with me here by this riffle and reflect on it.

Riffle? Can you reflect on a riffle, with its turbulence from shallow passage over rough bed? How much reflection could you get from a riffle through a book, the pages flicking by like a deck of cards? Surely your images would be shuffled, ruffled, filleted perhaps, less careful than a raffle? Indeed, the light laughing on the rippling surface of a riffle may leave you feeling unfulfilled, if not rueful, in its fitful flickering.

But it is not so awful: all is reflected, and there is something to be said for a new order. Just as the surface affects a photographic afflatus, below it there is a sedimental journey taking place: the rapidity and turbulence and helicoidal flows of the waters in this short stretch of stream achieve velocities sufficient for erosion and transport of small particles, to be precipitated when the aquatic traffic slows, in fulfillment of the Hjulström curve.

This is a way the language changes: bits are picked up from here and there and left in another place. We have rifle, we have ripple, we have ruffle; we find reflections of each in this word, like flecks of gold left in the riffle of a sluice. Riffle the cards and see what flips up: how mixed, and of what value? Is riffle, with its uncertain source, glittering bits of these words like water in rough ridged patterns (shaped as iffl), sufficiently artful?

Some seek always the calm, deep, still waters. But between pools you must have riffles, lifting, refreshing, snaffling particles in little scuffles, breaking the light. Shallow, fast, but not effortful; although deep pools have gravitas, it is simple gravity that effects this flow to refill the flatter floods. But it is not mere filler: much goes on. The bed this brook flows on is rough here, stirring. And above, leaves fall from the syntax trees, flutter, flop, float, flipping over the riffle: the pages of this brook.

floordrobe

Even if you’ve never heard this word before, I bet you can recognize it and nod and smile. Not everyone has a floordrobe, but more people than will admit it have one at least part of the time, and pretty much anyone who was ever a teenager will have had one (and I worry about anyone who made it through adolescence without one).

If for some reason the meaning is not altogether self-evident (perhaps you’re just a really tidy person), or if perhaps you just want to amuse yourself by seeing other people’s floordrobes, have a look at all these Instagram photos tagged with floordrobe: statigr.am/tag/floordrobe.

Got the picture? It’s like a flood of robes (and other clothes) on your floorboards. You may even need to seek a ford to get over it. When I was 13 or 14, I had to clear three little gaps on the floor between my bedroom door and my bed: one at the door, one partway to the bed, and another at the bed. Step, step, there. Now, of course, I actually use my closet – except for when it would be too much bother just at bedtime, or something like that.

And no, it’s not just a guy thing. All the blogs and similar sites that have floordrobe in them, at least of the ones I’ve found, are by young women about clothes: The Floordrobe (on tumblr), lexiesfloordrobe.com, the floordrobe (on WordPress), Hannah’s fashion-floordrobe, Welcome To My Floordrobe… you get the idea. Oh, and she might not like my saying this, but my wife has a floordrobe too. So there.

And yet, for something that’s probably been around as long as there have been floors and wardrobes, this form of clothing storage appears to have gotten the name floordrobe only quite recently. Most instances you will find are in the last half-decade to decade, and the earliest citation I’ve seen is one Word Spy found from 1994, from the Washington Post.

Say, how long have floor and wardrobe been around? Well, both are old Germanic words. Floor was flor in Old English and meant what it means today. Wardrobe did come from Old Norman French warderobe, a variant of Old French garderobe – but Old French got it from Germanic roots. And ward is seen in Old English: weard, “a guard, or guarding”. Old French robe, meaning “long outer garment”, meant before that “plunder, booty” (somewhat like the acquisitions those floordrobe bloggers linked above show, only of course we assume they actually paid for their loot); it comes from a Germanic source that is also the source of rob. Morphologically, you may note that floordrobe is as sloppy as a floordrobe: it has that d hanging there that comes from the ward that’s been replaced. But this portmanteau word works by the amusement of rhyming.

The vocal gesture of saying floordrobe is very, very similar to that of wardrobe; the only difference is that the /w/, with the lips rounded and the back of the tongue raised, is now /f/ – lips occluded with teeth, so a narrower opening – and /l/, which touches the tongue tip, and raises it at the back. In short, where /w/ is suspended in the air, /fl/ comes into contact like clothes on the floor. And it has the voicelessness of the /f/.

From there the word hollows into a mid back round vowel, which leads into /r/; it touches again at the tongue tip, /d/ (affricated due to the following /r/); then the gesture is reversed, liquid /r/ to back round vowel to a stop at the lips. If you say wardrobe slowly a few times, you get a sense of your tongue and lips as like a camera lens focusing back and forth or zooming in and out; the floordrobe version complicates it and makes it messier.

All that back vowel, liquid, retroflex, et cetera articulation makes the word suitable for a somewhat slovenly locution. Say it slowly as though your mouth were moving in molasses: “fflllooorrrrdrrrooobe.” It almost sounds like HAL 9000 slowing down in its cybernetic dementia. But you can of course say the word quickly, too: a flip, a shrug, a toss, like a sweater being gripped and everted and shrugged and doffed and ejected onto the rug.

orrery

You are in the milieu of an oratory, the floor around you reeling in the half dark, warps of sunlight from the clerestory woven with the woof of a lyrical aria, no, not even that – not opera or oratory but a spiritual:

I wonder as I wander out under the sky
How Jesus the saviour did come for to die
For poor ornery people like you and like I…

Ornery… are you so inured to the universe? But what is this arrangement of orbs that rallies around the origin of the circle dominated by the dome? Is it an horarius, an horary rotator revealing the hour airily? No, it artfully represents the errant planets – planet, wanderer: they wander, these spheres, in the music, in no hurry, and if you handle the gears they turn with a sound that is as liquid as the movement, a rolling sound that names the object: orrery.

An orrery! A whirl of worlds around the sun. A set of orbs wandering wondrously, such as this small one here that represents our own sphere on which we all wander and wonder. We know a boilery is a place where they boil, and a brewery where they brew; owlery is owlish behaviour, an antonym to raillery; so is an orrery a place where we have or or or, or a tendency to find such options, such alternate universes to revel in, a choice between horror and hooray in every rearing hour? Or is it really an errory, so error-riddled even its error is erring?

An orrery, really, is this mechanical assembly that represents the solar system. Designs have been made for such apparatuses through the eras, and various erudite minds have endeavoured to plan it, but in modern times two horarists, clockmakers, George Graham and Thomas Tompion, made the first as we know it in 1704. They asked John Rowley (a nice rolling word, Rowley) to make a copy for Prince Eugene of Savoy. In all of this, are we hearing of it being called a graham or a tompion or a rowley or a savoy? Hardly. But Rowley made another for his patron, Charles Boyle, fourth earl of Orrery. When he rendered it, he declared it to be an orrery.

And where is Orrery? Some rural area? In fact, it’s in Eire (Ireland), in the south – Cork. The peerage was created for the soldier Roger Boyle in 1660. The name is an anglicization of a place name, originally a tribe name: Orbhraighe. “Orb’s people.”

Wander around this orrery. Watch as the world turns; hear the wrangling gears of the music of the spheres, “orrery, orrery.” You are on the earth, one of our orb’s people, and this rounding ball is a representation of it all: in that spot there you are, regarding your earth, hearing this air. You wonder and you wander, whether you plan it or not, but you are always around this planetarium, this orrery, with all the ornery people, and all these ors to turn again.

bookstore, bookshop

Most ordinary kinds of stores and shops (e.g., grocery stores, auto body shops) do not have the dignity of a one-word designation. Purveyors of books have not one but two. Of course, that is a privilege of being a favoured haunt of those who plant, grow, and harvest words – the lexiculturists, the word gardeners and the wordyard owners, the noun brewers and verb distillers.

But while having two words is a luxury, it is not absolutely redundant. Just as two bottles of wines from neighbouring vineyards or different years of the same vineyard are different, so are two synonyms.

So… What is the difference between a bookstore and a bookshop?

Actually, the better question is, What is the difference between bookstore and bookshop?

The first difference is of course the shape and sound. The book is the same in both, a staple word in English; shop on the page is more angular than store, and so it matches book more forthrightly. Store has a sound as of a hobbyist’s rocket going off: small hiss, éclat, then a fading roar. Shop is more like a sliding door, for instance on the starship Enterprise: a rich hiss and then a stop.

But words are known by the company they keep, and these two words – store and shop – keep different company.

We see store more with ordinary commercial establishments: grocery store, department store, convenience store, hardware store, general store, liquor store, corner store, quartermaster store; it has a utilitarian tone and an image of massing set by the verb store, and you think of shelves laden with dry goods in storage (and then there’s cold storage), and you know – or don’t know – what’s in store.

On the other hand, shop has different aspects. It can be a machine shop or auto body shop, or it can be one of those great old staple focused establishments: butcher shop, barber shop, flower shop. That air of the old fashioned results in its getting the faux-archaic spelling in places such as chocolate shoppe and antique shoppe. Higher-toned establishments like it; a place like Body Shop is not a discount store. It seems to encourage spending; after all, who doesn’t like shopping? (Obviously a thrift shop is a bit of an exception.) While a store is a place you go to get stuff, a shop can be a place to go to be in and interact – definitely true of a coffee shop. (It is a coincidence, but a nice one, that it has an old homophone in scop, an Old English storyteller, poet or minstrel.)

Would you like to make a guess as to which of these two comes from old Germanic roots and which from Latin? Newer loans tend to be more precise and less value-toned, while words that have grown up with the language tend to have richer meanings and associations and more nuances of use. So it should not be so surprising that on the one hand we have a clipped-down mutation from Latin instaurare “restore” and on the other we have a word that in Old English meant about the same thing but was written sceoppa.

So, faced with a word on one side that smacks of tore and star and perhaps Boxster, and one on the other side that could make you think of butcher and chop and make you see books hop, but given those associations, which do you prefer?

Twenty years ago, I worked in a bookstore. Well, it was actually a Classic Bookshop, but I usually referred to it as a bookstore. It was in West Edmonton Mall; it was a large store, with lots of variety, but not that cozy, friendly feel you may expect from a bookshop. Nonetheless, when I wrote a little piece about it, I decided I liked bookshop better. Here’s what I wrote. You decide whether it’s a bookshop or a boosktore – or suitably either.

A Bookshop

by James Harbeck

The books are arranged in rank and file on the shelves, row upon row, some turning a shoulder to the customer in deference, others exposing themselves to full view. Many new ones stand eagerly in place, shining, ready to be taken home and read; elsewhere, veterans lounge in less tidy condition, their pages separating, their backs swerving, on top of them a fuzz of dust for blowing off into a ghost of a cloud, or sometimes even requiring wiping with the finger. The shelves accumulate dust, too, especially the lower ones; one may, in many places, use the bottom edge of a book to scrape a little roll of it, and blow it back onto the floor whence it came.

There are all kinds of customers: men in comfortable grey business suits who plop down a management book onto the counter next to their cellular telephones, and pay with a credit card; women, some of them younger than you would think, wearing Zellers’ blue shirts over early cellulite buildups and stacking $2.79 romances like pancakes; computer jockeys in a wide variety of attire, either earnest-looking young men, intelligent in aspect and unmoderated in enthusiasm, often casually dressed, or men in their forties, who bring the books up like one doing a duty, but either way, it’s one book at a time, almost always by credit card, and it’s always men – more women buy Playboy than buy computer books; young mothers, happy but tired, or sometimes just plain fed up, usually buying a few inexpensive hardcover children’s books and one or two easy paperbacks for themselves – and their children always want to ring the bell; tourists, all shapes and sizes, and once in a month or two one will get to speak French or even have to try one’s rusty German; people who plunk down ponderous piles of bargain-priced books, ranging from the quiet, greybearded gentleman who sorts through the “hurt” paperback bin, list in hand, to the occasional 12-year-old boy buying a gift for his father in the form of a very large and very inexpensive book, who cares what about; boys from 13 to 30 who inspect carefully the contents of the science fiction section, and girls of the same ages buying all nature of serialized, romantic and intriguing material; future – or present – Miss Marples (and the odd Sherlock wannabe, but no V. I. Warshawskis), with one or two carefully selected mysteries; and so on and so forth, most polite, many pleasant, only one or two in a year so rude as to make one beat a hasty exit to the back room for a vent-out and cool-off session. The rude ones are generally people of unclear thought and expression, who seem to expect a sort of E.S.P. on the part of a clerk and who automatically assume that this tie-bedecked specimen peering confusedly at them through glasses is an inferior sort of being.

There are kinds of pollution here, too, even aside from the omnipresent dust which can tend to ingrain itself into one’s fingertips. There are wax paper soft drink containers left sitting, used, on the shelves and displays; there are odd bits of gum (a curse on the placers!) and small wrappers; there was, once, the lady who used the previous day’s newspapers to clean up her child’s mess; and there is noise pollution. The roar of the fountains, 15 feet out from the storefront, is omnipresent, to the extent that, when they are inoperative, the store seems wrapped in an eerie, almost oppressive stillness. There are voices, too; rarely is one treated to the crisp chocolatey tones of whispered conversation, so common in libraries. On occasion, infants too young to know better – or not – scream incessantly. And then there is the bell.

The bell, like the bookstore, is big, a good six inches in diameter and four inches high. It looks like any other counter bell, but overgrown. It’s shiny but fingerprinted and a bit smirched, and it sits slightly askew on its black base. Behind it is the latest in a long line of signs, a cardboard rectangle bearing a request, neatly lettered in black with pink, to PLEASE RING THE BELL FOR SERVICE. (Few people who do not work in the store see the less tidy legend on the back: BELL SIGN DO NOT THROW OUT, and, in different lettering, RING THIS.) And ring it they do: from timid tings to wrestling-bell bings (accomplished with a rolled-up newspaper). Its tone is nice, not louder, as most expect, but simply lower than average. The amount of fiddling, bending and bolstering which has been enacted upon it by sedulous clerks in order to facilitate such sound – for its internal workings were faultily construed – is never appreciated by those who ring it.

A note on the ringing: it is mostly done when not necessary, frequently while purchases are being run through. If a clerk is actually unable to see the customers as they stand at the counter, the customers will often wait up to half a minute before following the instructions so tidily displayed before their eyes. People are less shy when a clerk is actually there, although most prefer merely to comment that it’s the biggest bell they’ve ever seen.

Every day, except weekends, two or more trolleys loaded with brown cardboard boxes come trundling down the wide left aisle and deposit their loads in a small area of cleared carpet near the back, and once a week a very large trolley, a sort of manually operated forklift, rumbles imposingly straight to the back room, stacked six feet high with cardboard cubes containing bargain books. These boxes stay in the back; the smaller daily loads usually return severally, in twos and threes, to the front, where they are dealt with next to the cash registers. Twice a week, also, boxes stuffed with magazines are trafficked, and once a week, a large, heavy package wrapped in brown paper is pounded onto the floor with the boxes of books: the British magazines.

A special method has been developed by one clerk for the unpacking of large boxes of paperbacks: a clipboard is placed over the open top, the works are inverted and the books are unmolded into four or six neat stacks as the cardboard is lifted away. Not all procedures are so tidy, though, especially if involving a box with an unsealed bottom. More than once, a hapless clerk has found his feet surrounded by heaps of books which have chosen the back way out. But the sound of falling books is usually met with restrained laughter.

There are plenty of falling books to be heard, too, for some demonic designer decided to construe shelves for this store which, while versatile, rest at an acute angle to their backing wall. Gravity thus feeds the bottoms of books into the tight corner formed, and the volumes, no longer being perpendicular to their shelves, lean forward and somersault onto the rug. More spectacular mishaps are managed by the bargain displays, which are in the form of pyramids: the volumes standing on the top, if unbalanced, will fall onto the next level, and, combining with the books there, will proceed to the next, and so forth, producing an almost-lethal avalanche of reading material. The closest customers will either guiltily attempt a hurried tidying of the mess, or remove themselves from the scene instantly.

Fallen books are always replaced eventually, if not always with great dispatch; when they’re on the floor, after all, they’re not going anywhere, are they? And sometimes employees will glance in passing at a dislocated book, but leave it untouched for an hour or more. They almost always have something else to do.

The employees may be seen: walking in between two points; encouraging the concise arrangement of their product; on occasion, surrounded by huge stacks of books and looking ruminatively at a bare pyramid, deciding how to build it; or standing, clipboard and pencil in hand, gazing at the shelves, looking for that one book out of the 35,000 in stock, the existence of which they must verify. If you approach them, they will be characteristically modestly polite, sometimes quite helpful, sometimes unenthusiastic. Their minds are to the task at hand, liked or hated. And if the till is the responsibility of a clerk, he or she will, at the ring of the bell, post with dispatch to the cash desk. This is usually the time when customers seem to stop them on their way, requiring some obscure title; the phone seems to ring more often at this point, too. Things happen in clusters around here. Breaks to the back room are always welcome.

In the back room ,which is smaller than your living-room but likely a bit bigger than your bedroom, the manager and assistant manager take up residence among the array of boxes, shelves and heaped books. A desk, a filing cabinet and various necessary papers, messily piled, may also be found. The clerks who take refuge there from time to time will read, eat, or, more often, swap rude jokes and irreverent insights. Conversation ranging from the benign to the potentially extremely offensive is slightly muffled by the door bearing the legend EMPLOYEES ONLY. Its open or closed state depends on the degree of secrecy desired by those within, on the frequency of traffic in and out of the room at that time, or on the amount of heat accumulated from the large electrical transformer which sits under a makeshift counter. The back room is the inner sanctum, where marketing secrets are kept, attitudes are let into the open, the odd cigarette is smoked. And it is here, with the door closed, that employees will take cartloads of paperback books, lifted of late from the shelves and the dust puffed away from them, and, bending the card-paper back, will grasp the books in two hands and rip, denuding them of their covers, and consigning glued packets of naked pulp paper by the hundreds to reused boxes, to be taken out to the trash compactor.