# Fun with the English language **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [February 19, 2005, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888 "2005-02-19T14:38:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Scribble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scribble/32/3317_2.png) [@Scribble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scribble)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/1 "2005-02-19T14:38:30Z")
I bought a bag of dates at my local co-op. The label said “organic Medjool dates (pitted).” I popped a date in my mouth only to discover–hey! These dates have pits in them! Then it occurred to me that someone who doesn’t speak English as a native language may have labeled the bag. After all, wouldn’t it be logical to expect that something with a pit inside of it could be described as “pitted”? After all, a plant that’s grown roots is “rooted,” and something that’s had paint applied to it is “painted.” Once I thought about it for a second, I saw that this situation becomes even more complicated in some cases. For example–if someone says that their furniture was dusted, that means that dust was taken _off_ the furniture. If someone says their crops were dusted, that means that dust was put _on_ the crops. So the word “dusted” means two opposite things in two contexts. Anyone else think of any other examples, where a single word (like “dusted”) means two opposite things? Or where a word, like “pitted,” means exactly the opposite of what you’d expect? ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/2 "2005-02-19T14:46:42Z")
It’s not _quite_ what you have in mind, but let me say that I have always found it odd that warning labesl may say “flammable” (item will go burn, burn dangerous", yet also use “inflammable” to mean “item may go burn, burn , dangerous”. Wouldn’t it be useful if the latter were the opposite of the former? ---
**Author:** ![norinew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb9ed0/32.png) [@norinew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/norinew)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/3 "2005-02-19T15:56:51Z")
When directions say to “Grease the bottom of a pan”, you might be in big trouble if you take the directions _literally_. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/4 "2005-02-19T16:25:58Z")
The term is _autantonyms_ – words with two definitions that are near or exact opposites of each other depending on context. “The couple pledged to cleave to each other until death; the axe cleaved the firewood clean through.” “I cannot sanction your behavior; in fact, the policy makers have placed sanctions against similar behavior.” “The gaiety of the young girl romping with her boyfriend helped to cheer up the depressed gay man.” ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/5 "2005-02-19T16:33:59Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > “The gaiety of the young girl romping with her boyfriend helped to cheer up the depressed gay man.” That’s not really a great example, though. The first word that generally comes to mind is overlook–after all, a committee set up to overlook a project should not overlook its mistakes. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/6 "2005-02-19T16:44:21Z")
Does hobbyist usage count? The word **junking** , which usually means “throwing something out,” is used by record collectors to mean _acquiring_ platters in junk shops and the like. Example: Ma Plotzwinkle **junked** all her Louis Jordan 78s at the Hadassah thrift shop. A few weeks later, Johnny Watchfob **junked** them all from there. ---
**Author:** ![ErinPuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dbc845/32.png) [@ErinPuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ErinPuff)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/7 "2005-02-19T17:28:17Z")
And then there’s “pitted” meaning “posted about in the Pit,” which is what I thought of before “doesn’t have pits in it.” ---
**Author:** ![Nahk\_Ila\_Dihahs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/858c86/32.png) [@Nahk\_Ila\_Dihahs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nahk_Ila_Dihahs)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/8 "2005-02-19T17:33:01Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > after all, a committee set up to overlook a project should not overlook its mistakes. Shouldn’t the sentence be “after all, a committee set up to **oversee** a project should not overlook its mistakes” ? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/9 "2005-02-19T17:38:28Z")
> [@Beware of Doug](#): > > Does hobbyist usage count? The word **junking** , which usually means “throwing something out,” is used by record collectors to mean _acquiring_ platters in junk shops and the like. > > Example: Ma Plotzwinkle **junked** all her Louis Jordan 78s at the Hadassah thrift shop. A few weeks later, Johnny Watchfob **junked** them all from there. I’ve also heard this used in reference to any type of collectable. To go junking is to go to yard/garage sales looking for interesting stuff. ---
**Author:** ![ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c77e96/32.png) [@ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/10 "2005-02-19T17:53:10Z")
My issue with the English language has often been words that don’t HAVE meanings, even though they have opposites. They mean one thing and one thing only. For instance, has anyone you know ever been “whelmed?” No? Well, you’ve been overwhelmed and underwhelmed. Why not whelmed? Is the opposite of confused fused? Refused? Defused? ---
**Author:** ![Savannah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Savannah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Savannah)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/11 "2005-02-19T18:38:34Z")
I’ve never seen anyone described as being ruthful or shevelled, either. But ruthless, and dishevelled… ---
**Author:** ![Devil\_s\_Advocate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Devil\_s\_Advocate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Devil_s_Advocate)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/12 "2005-02-19T19:05:40Z")
Similar to what others have mentioned, “unloosen” means the same thing as “loosen”, I believe. This one is a grammar thing, not about a particular word, but… Have you ever noticed how sometimes a negation inside a question doesn’t change the meaning of the question per se, but just indicates that a “no” response would be unexpected? Essentially, it’s a single negative making a positive. Isn’t that odd? By which I mean, of course, “Is that odd?” See what I mean? The answer to one question is the same as the answer to the other, even thought one contains a “not” the other doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![fighting\_ignorant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ac8455/32.png) [@fighting\_ignorant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fighting_ignorant)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/13 "2005-02-19T20:02:15Z")
> [@Devil's Advocate](#): > > This one is a grammar thing, not about a particular word, but… Have you ever noticed how sometimes a negation inside a question doesn’t change the meaning of the question per se, but just indicates that a “no” response would be unexpected? Essentially, it’s a single negative making a positive. Isn’t that odd? By which I mean, of course, “Is that odd?” Don’t you see? Isn’t it obvious? Am I not clear? ---
**Author:** ![Sternvogel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@Sternvogel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sternvogel)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/14 "2005-02-20T04:25:17Z")
In the USA, to “table” an item under discussion is to stop discussing the item – to take the matter off the table, so to speak. In Britain, you place the proposal _on_ the table if you “table” it. According to my dictionary, to quit is to **resign** , while to sign up again is to **re-sign**. In common usage, however, the latter term is often written without the hyphen, so the headline **COACH WILSON RESIGNS** could mean either that he leaves his position or that he inks a renewal of his contract. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/15 "2005-02-20T04:27:57Z")
> [@Devil's Advocate](#): > > Similar to what others have mentioned, “unloosen” means the same thing as “loosen”, I believe. How about disembowel? To do the opposite, would you embowel? Rebowel? ---
**Author:** ![Jenaroph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e8c25b/32.png) [@Jenaroph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jenaroph)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/16 "2005-02-20T04:32:36Z")
> [@Nahk Ila Dihahs](#): > > Shouldn’t the sentence be > “after all, a committee set up to **oversee** a project should not overlook its mistakes” ? And if they did, the overseers would be committing an oversight. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fun-with-the-english-language/290888/17 "2005-02-20T04:38:28Z")
“Strike”: to remove (they struck the set), to create (they struck a committee). “Fix”: to make whole (they fixed the fence), to remove part of (they fixed the cat).