I just wanted to comment on the ironic perfection of the “where did -age come from?” article. In addition to being well written and quite interesting (for a guy who really doesn’t care much about etymology, anyway), it’s also quite amusing that bibliophage wrote it. I still don’t know what that name means! Anyway, good job bib! <=
Oops, sorry sticky. Didn’t see that post before posting.
Here ya go!
[edited to fix coding]
I’m stupid.
No HTML codeage. vB codeage only.
I suppose bibliophage means, literally, “book eater.” “Biblio” = “book” (as in “Holy Bible,” bibliography, bibliophile, etc.) and “phage” = “eater of” (as in macrophage, etc.)
RR
One of the examples bibliophage lists is “viaticum”, which he states, in English, refers to the journey, rather than the provisions for the same. But the only context in which I’ve ever heard the term is Catholic theology, where it refers to the Eucharist as given to a dying person. Here, it does refer to the provisions for a journey, even if in a philosophical sense.
A “bibliophage” is a book eater, from the Greek words [symbol]biblioV[/symbol] (“book”) and [symbol]fagaV[/symbol] (“glutton”). I’ve seen it used in English, where it usually refers to a person who figuratively devours books. I haven’t found it in any dictionary yet. The word “bibliophagist” does show up in some dictionaries, but it doesn’t sound as cool. Bibliophage is also a French word, but I haven’t seen it in any print French dictionary either. According tothe Petit glossaire du bibliophile et de l’amateur de livres it refers to insects or other vermin that destroy books, or to people who literally eat books.
Perhaps the report is phrased poorly. What I meant was that the English word “voyage” and the French voyage and the vulgar Latin viaticum all mean “trip.” In the classical Latin, it originally meant “provisions for a trip” or “travel expenses,” particularly the money a soldier saved or borrowed so he could travel back home. I wasn’t referring to the English word “viaticum,” which I didn’t know existed until just now. Interesting (to me anyway) is the fact that “viaticum” is the only English word in the 1913 Webster’s that ends in -aticum. The AHD gives these definitions
Back to signage, if I may revert to it: Having driven across America three times (approx. 11,000-12,000 miles each time), I can tell you that some cities suffer from poor signage (i.e., having confusing or misleading signs that do not allow a visiting driver to find his destination on the first try)–and my co-pilot hears about each time! That’s the only time I have used the word, and it’s a good word because I’m not talking about bad signs, per se–they look like all the rest. Bad signage, to me, simply means not having the right signs in the right places to help visiting drivers find their way ON THE FIRST TRY. This may be on the highway or on city streets.
For the phrase “bad signage” to come up, I have to miss more than just a couple of turns or exits in one city–I have to stop for directions, or go around several blocks, or exit the highway and turn around (due to the signage, not just my incompetence).
And there are cities where the signs take you directly where you want to go. Excellent signage!
My least favorite non-word in common use is “proactive,” used to mean the opposite of “reactive.” The opposite of “reactive” actually is, of course, just “active.” Following the same logic, the opposite of “restate” would be “prostate.”
I feel the poster’s pain. Everytime I hear someone utter the word “incent” my blood turns to ice. The closest www.m-w.com comes is “incant” and “incest”. Something tells me that those who think “incent” is a word are victims of both.
The opposite of “reactive” would be “unreactive.” The opposite of “active” would be “inactive.”
To be active is to act. To be reactive is to act in response. To be proactive is to act in anticipation of something. They’re all perfectly cromulent words.
The Dope Corollary to Godwin’s Law: As a thread on etymology or ‘proper’ English grows longer, the probability of the use of the word cromulent approaces one.
- And I took the book from the hand of the angel and ate it up: and it was in my mouth, sweet as honey. And when I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
So, for every action there is an equal and opposite inaction? 
So this tech-writer, a woman I’ll call R, was fond of deliberately dying just the ends of her hair red. One day she shows up with her hair dyed red from tips to scalp. Karen, another tech writer comments favorably on this. Replies R, “Yeah, less roots.” Karen, who has corrected her share of prose, says “Fewer roots.” Not what R wanted, but she sees the problem. She thinks a moment, then says, triumphantly, “Less rootage.”
Myself, I am fond of referring to the collective abdominal skin being displayed by women these days as “midriffage.” Mass nouns are handy things, as long as you don’t take them too seriously.
A friend of mine refers to New Age music as “newage,” rhymes with “sewage”…
From bibliophage’s article:
“You are free to coin your own -age words, but they aren’t likely to make it into the dictionary unless they catch on.”
You could probably bribe someone if you had enough buckage.
JamesCaroll, can you give us some usage notes on the (non)word “incent”? I’ve never heard that one, and I’m not sure what it’s supposed to mean. Some sort of back-formation of “incentive”, perhaps? And what does “cromulent” mean, while we’re at it?
You are correct: incent is a back-formation from incentive.
Cromulent is a word used in Springfield almost exclusively. Along with embiggens.
AFAIK, it first appeared in a The Simpsons episode in the phrase “a perfectly ~ word,” apparently meaning “legitimate, acceptable” or perhaps simply “good,” the gag being that it was itself incromulent.
I used it in my post for one or more of the following reasons:
A) I’m a big geek.
B) I was cleverly(?) making the point that, although I could theoretically defend the word in question (“proactive”), I couldn’t wholeheartedly support its use.
C) I was obeying a natural law, to wit: