# I HATE GLEE... in which I pit the inadequacy of American English **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 12, 2005, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799 "2005-02-12T22:32:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/41 "2005-02-14T06:37:54Z")
**EddyTeddyFreddy.** Eh, already tried. Won’t fit in the “title” box. **schadenfreude** is like the ugliest German cognate kidnapped into pimp daddy America’s International Brothel of Words. All the other stolen words get some love on the regular. _Feng shui_? New girl, popular, out every night. _Okra?_ Been busy since the 1600s. \*schadenfreude? \* Sitting unwanted next to her ugly cousin _fahrvenugen._ ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/42 "2005-02-14T07:14:19Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > **blowero.** Cognates are words borrowed from another languages, like jazz, haiku, tomato, ennui, hero and googol Sorry, I have no idea what your point is. I _thought_ that you were disagreeing with Liberal, who pointed out that much of the English language comes from other languages. When you said: > [@](#): > > No, most of my post was in my native language which is composed of borrowed cognates. YOU understood it, so it’s not “foreign” I thought you were trying to distinguish between **cognates** , which are words that are _“related in origin, as certain words in genetically related languages descended from the same ancestral root; for example, English name and Latin nmen”_, and **borrowed words** , which are not just related by a common root, but are identical. But now you’re conflating the two things, so I really don’t know what you’re trying to say. > [@](#): > > – or words in several languages that share a common root and meaning, Yes, that’s what a cognate is. > [@](#): > > like the many similar-sounding words for “two.” Some words are newer than others. Some words are more difficult to spell and pronounce than others. What makes a cognate an accepted part of the language is the extent to which it is used by the population at large. Yes, and _schadenfreude_ is such a word. > [@](#): > > **blowero** and **Uvula Donor**. Oh, good. You got your dictionaries. Here’s what I think without looking in mine: if it looks German, spelled German, pronounced German and treated as a foreign word along with a translation, it is NOT “really” an American English word, damned what the damn books say. Right. Nobody would ever accept a word into the English language that looks and sounds German. I learned that in kindergarten. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/43 "2005-02-14T07:19:28Z")
Doh :smack: I meant to say that schadenfreude is _accepted_, not that it is a cognate. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/44 "2005-02-14T07:44:16Z")
**Knorf.** You forgot deja vu, which is what I’m experiencing. I accept all those other cognates you listed because they: 1) are consistently used without italics and 2) are widely disseminated by the millions in America, so much that 3) the average American can tell you what they mean. Like, say, glee. _Schadenfreude_ is NONE of those things! It’s an elistist, marginalized, obscure, little-used, infrequently acknowledged emotion anywhere outside Germany, academia and one seventh season episode of _The Simpsons._ Maybe not even that well known in Germany. You get twice as many hits Googling it in English than German – but it’s apparently still under 300,000 hits in BOTH languages in the entire world wide web. Again: forget the dictionary. Dictionaries can be wrong. Forget the theory and look at the practice. A foreign cognate treated as a foreign concept in print and electronic media is not truly contemporary American English – not in the Information Age. It potentially can be, and someday might be but right now it ain’t. Christ. You know _schadenfreude_ isn’t even listed in the appendix of _Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs To Know (1987)_? This from an author who doesn’t even list poi, ennui, vogue, Rashoman, fatwah, gotterdammerang, Consigliori or The Kama Sutra. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/45 "2005-02-14T07:52:53Z")
**blowero.** Read my post above as it may address some of your concerns. And “cognate” refers equally valid to two types of foreign words, much as “noun” can be used to categorize persons, places, things, and ideas. I’m not conflating things when I consider both. The word is kindergarten. Americans pronounce it “kindergarden”, much as we normally soften the t’s in _butter_ and _party_. It only looks German and spelled German: it’s pronounced with a distinct American variation and – most importantly – everybody knows what it is without explanation. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/46 "2005-02-14T09:19:28Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > “cognate” refers equally valid to two types of foreign words, A. No it doesn’t. Look in the dictionary; “cognates” are _related_ words, not identical words. B. Then I still don’t understand what your point was vis a vis Liberal’s post. > [@](#): > > much as “noun” can be used to categorize persons, places, things, and ideas. I’m not conflating things when I consider both. I have no idea what the definition of “noun” has to do with it. > [@](#): > > The word is kindergarten. Yes, I know. That’s why I wrote it. > [@](#): > > Americans pronounce it “kindergarden”, Some, perhaps, but most pronounce it with a “t” sound. > [@](#): > > much as we normally soften the t’s in _butter_ and _party_. Yes, Americans use a softer “t” sound than Germans. But then, we use a different “r” sound when we say schadenfreude, for that matter. So what’s your point? > [@](#): > > It only looks German and spelled German: it’s pronounced with a distinct American variation And so is schadenfreude. > [@](#): > > and – most importantly – everybody knows what it is without explanation. Whether “everybody knows what it is” is not the determining factor for whether a word is considered part of the English language or not. For example, you didn’t know what the word “converse” meant in another thread. That doesn’t mean “converse” is not an English word. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/47 "2005-02-14T12:05:03Z")
What did I say about dictionaries sometimes being wrong? Look, **blowero**. [All cognates are related to words in other languages, likr German.](http://german.about.com/library/blcognates_A.htm) But SOME are identical, or nearly identical, borrowed words, like the spanish words burro, chocolate and negro. [Cite1.](http://spanish.about.com/cs/vocabulary/g/cognategloss.htm) There are many false cognates as well, which are derived from the same roots but have different meanings, as in French. [Cite2.](http://french.about.com/library/fauxamis/blfauxam.htm) All nouns are persons, places, things or ideas… four kinds are nouns. Simliarly, there are two kinds of cognates. This was offered in the (vain) hopes you would, by yourself, unassisted, be able to relate the two concepts. You keep insisting on there being one kind of cognate _when this is patently false._ This statement of yours: “Whether “everybody knows what it is” is not the determining factor for whether a word is considered part of the English language or not,” is wrong. [Cite3.](http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/italics.htm) > [@Webster's Use of Italics](#): > > **Foreign Words or Phrases** > If a word or phrase has become so widely used and understood that it has become part of the English language — such as the French “bon voyage” or the abbreviation for the latin et cetera, “etc.” — we would not italicize it. Often this becomes a matter of private judgment and context. For instance, whether you italicize the Italian _sotto voce_ depends largely on your audience and your subject matter. Among average American English speakers, the term _schandenfruede_ is by no means so widely used and understood that it should be unitalicized. Despite what some dictionaries may say actual use, practice, understanding, dissemination and style manual recommendations all suggest this and similar words should be treated as foreign. Regarding the other thread, I stand by my observation that “converse” is not as clear a word choice as “reverse,” just as I now make the observation that you can be intractably picayune. If you wish to bring up matters from that other thread – again – resurrect that other thread and I might join you, provided discourse doesn’t include another distasteful fit of pique on your part. Otherwise I may see fit to **raise my “voice” again.** Won’t be nice like last time. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/48 "2005-02-14T13:04:21Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > To **glee** : Cad? Bouncer? Are you sure that’s your insult hat on? Sorry for the confusion, mate. But weren’t you secretly briefly thrilled to think you had a cyberfoe who pitted you? Tis’ a wise Klingon proverb which says that “Only our enemies make us truly alive.” (Okay, no. I think I made that up.) Obviously I’m a gentleman (and, as it happens, a teacher.) Therefore these are appropriate words to use. While it may be fun to have a cyberfoe, I would prefer to have one who knew that schadenfreude was an English word. 😛 As indeed are zugswang, en passant and zweischenzug. “‘oy’ DasIQjaj” ---
**Author:** ![Uvula\_Donor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Uvula\_Donor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uvula_Donor)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/49 "2005-02-14T13:14:28Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > . . .just as I now make the observation that you can be intractably picayune. Heh. Pot. Kettle. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/50 "2005-02-14T13:16:56Z")
It would be great if dictionaries recorded all connotations, but it’d make the OED into a building sized tome instead of a room sized tome. So I wouldn’t be surprised if dictionaries didn’t record glee as “excessive happieness” whether or not it has connotations of naughtiness. I mean, you’re not even told when to use ‘tall’ and when to use ‘high’ except for from a couple of examples. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/51 "2005-02-14T17:38:31Z")
_Et tu_, **glee**? You wound me, sir. Recognizing _en passant_ and knowing your passion, I assumed _zugzwang_ and _zweizenzug_ were chess moves, too. My friend, obscure chess jargon using German and French terms is not any American English I’d been taught. I suspect your worldview has been warped by your obsession and I suddenly fear for the names you might bestow on your hapless household pets or children. Still, I will not presume any great estimation of the vocabularies of your fellow countrymen who may know the terms you mentioned, though I have heard Ozzy and the rest of the Osbournes speak and thus hold profound reservations accordingly. **Uvula Donor.** More at, “the assured, black, well-seasoned pot is calling the petulant kettle rusty and full of hot air.” **Shade.** I’ll tell you which you use. “Tall” is how I feel. “High” describes the rest of these bastards. They should share that ganja they’re smoking. Next we’ll have some damn Trekkies in here claiming _bat’leth_, _katra_ and _oomox_ are English. Philistines. You are derailing this thread from glee. You gleefully do this, as evidenced by these damned smilies cropping up since **glee** ’s first post! Tossers. Motherfuckers. _Schweinehund-- !_ ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/52 "2005-02-14T19:13:16Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > Look, **blowero**. [All cognates are related to words in other languages, likr German.](http://german.about.com/library/blcognates_A.htm) But SOME are identical, or nearly identical, borrowed words, like the spanish words burro, chocolate and negro. O.K., I have a cite and you have a cite. I don’t really care, because the QUESTION I ASKED YOU was what your point was vis a vis **Liberal’s** post. And you still haven’t answered the question. YOU were the one who seemed to be making a distinction between cognates, and words that come from other languages. Now you are jumping up and down and screaming about how those two things are the same. So again, WHAT’S YOUR POINT? > [@](#): > > [Cite1.](http://spanish.about.com/cs/vocabulary/g/cognategloss.htm) There are many false cognates as well, which are derived from the same roots but have different meanings, as in French. [Cite2.](http://french.about.com/library/fauxamis/blfauxam.htm) So what? You strike me as a guy who took just enough freshman English classes to learn a couple buzz words before flunking out, and now you want to impress everyone. Sorry, not impressed. > [@](#): > > All nouns are persons, places, things or ideas… four kinds are nouns. Simliarly, there are two kinds of cognates. This was offered in the (vain) hopes you would, by yourself, unassisted, be able to relate the two concepts. You keep insisting on there being one kind of cognate _when this is patently false._ Again. What’s your point? > [@](#): > > This statement of yours: “Whether “everybody knows what it is” is not the determining factor for whether a word is considered part of the English language or not,” is wrong. [Cite3.](http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/italics.htm) Uh, that was YOUR statement, genius. > [@](#): > > Among average American English speakers, the term _schandenfruede_ is by no means so widely used and understood that it should be unitalicized. Despite what some dictionaries may say actual use, practice, understanding, dissemination and style manual recommendations all suggest this and similar words should be treated as foreign. Your OP is all about complaining that we don’t have a word that means the same as schandenfruede, and yet you’re having a tantrum about _not_ wanting it to be part of the language. Yeah, that makes sense. > [@](#): > > Regarding the other thread, I stand by my observation that “converse” is not as clear a word choice as “reverse,” And I stand by my observation that you’re WRONG. > [@](#): > > just as I now make the observation that you can be intractably picayune. Heh heh - see Uvula’s post. 😃 And I’ll remind you that YOU are the one who brought up the “converse” vs. “reverse” thing, totally out of the blue, when it had nothing to do with the thread topic. And then you call _me_ picayune. Damn, you’re funny. > [@](#): > > If you wish to bring up matters from that other thread – again – resurrect that other thread and I might join you, provided discourse doesn’t include another distasteful fit of pique on your part. > Otherwise I may see fit to **raise my “voice” again.** > Won’t be nice like last time. No thanks - I got out of that thread because you were having a meltdown. Judging by your childish use of large fonts, you seem headed in that direction here as well. Maybe you should take a few deep breaths. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2005, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/53 "2005-02-14T23:55:31Z")
**blowero.** No, no, no, son. Don’t parse my statements about you like you usually do with everything else. Be man enough to accept this about yourself: you are _intractably_ picayune. You are petty and you don’t change. Time and again I present cites, examples, point out like simliar categorization, real world usage and observe how foreign language cognates have to satisfy a set of criteria to be considered truly a part of an adopted language. Do you challenge this idea? No! You focus on “cognate.” I scrutinize many details; you think about three things. That’s “picayune.” You consistently refuse to employ the benefits of inductive thinking as well as deductive reasoning. Look over your posts where you, time and again, respond to only part of what I’m saying, harping on “what’s your point?” and accusing me of flunking out of college. I didn’t believe you were really being that obtuse and unable to recognize patterns. But come to think of it you pulled the same stunts in **pizzabrat’s** thread last week. I’m bored with you, son. Good-bye. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2005, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/54 "2005-02-15T07:30:45Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > **blowero.** No, no, no, son. Some more of the patented Askia maturity, I see. We used to do that “son” thing in 3rd grade, if I recall correctly. You did it in the other thread, too, so I guess it makes you feel like a “man” or something. Well knock yourself out, then. > [@](#): > > Don’t parse my statements about you like you usually do with everything else. Be man enough to accept this about yourself: you are _intractably_ picayune. You are petty and you don’t change. Yes, you incorrectly harp on me about “converse” vs. “reverse”, and then about “cognates” vs. “borrowed words”. Then you act like it’s some sort of big deal, even after I tell you I don’t really care because it’s not the point. And you say _I’m_ picayune. 😃 Yeah, maybe if you keep saying it enough, it’ll come true? > [@](#): > > Time and again I present cites, examples, point out like simliar categorization, real world usage and observe how foreign language cognates have to satisfy a set of criteria to be considered truly a part of an adopted language. Do you challenge this idea? No! You focus on “cognate.” I scrutinize many details; you think about three things. That’s “picayune.” You consistently refuse to employ the benefits of inductive thinking as well as deductive reasoning. Uh, no, that’s pretty much exactly what YOU did. > [@](#): > > Look over your posts where you, time and again, respond to only part of what I’m saying, harping on “what’s your point?” Only because you never answered the question. You just kept pretending that the argument was about the definition of nouns and other such nonsense. You don’t want to get around to what your actual _point_ is, because you don’t have one. > [@](#): > > and accusing me of flunking out of college. I didn’t believe you were really being that obtuse and unable to recognize patterns. Don’t know what you mean, but I do know that you seem to be incapable of parsing a simple dictionary definition, despite your delusion that you are some sort of expert in the English language. > [@](#): > > But come to think of it you pulled the same stunts in **pizzabrat’s** thread last week. Must be a different thread, because in the thread I read, you acted like a big baby, nitpicked me about silly, irrelevant grammar details (which you weren’t even right about), screamed at me in oversize fonts, and used grade-school level insults, at which point I left in disgust. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2005, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/55 "2005-02-15T11:19:32Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > _Et tu_, **glee**? You wound me, sir. Recognizing _en passant_ and knowing your passion, I assumed _zugzwang_ and _zweizenzug_ were chess moves, too. My friend, obscure chess jargon using German and French terms is not any American English I’d been taught. I don’t think we should judge whether a word is obscure just because **you** don’t know it! In any English language chess book (including the US), the words above will be given without explanation or italics. They are part of the English language. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2005, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/56 "2005-02-15T12:30:48Z")
**glee.** I called them obscure because [answer.com](http://answer.com)’s [Language directory](http://www.answers.com/zugzwang&r=67) lists\* zugzwang\* in its “obscure” section and doesn’t list _zweizenzug_ at all (its probably misspelled, but I couldn’t figure out the correct spelling.) Googling didn’t help me find it at all, and Googling **zugzwang** only netted me 13,000 hits out of 8 billion webpages! That’s pretty obscure. **glee.** Did you see this post of mine? I’ll boldface the revelant passage. > [@Originally Posted by Webster's Use of Italics](#): > > **Foreign Words or Phrases** > If a word or phrase has become so widely used and understood that it has become part of the English language — such as the French “bon voyage” or the abbreviation for the latin et cetera, “etc.” — we would not italicize it. Often this becomes a matter of private judgment and context. **For instance, whether you italicize the Italian _“sotto voce”_ depends largely on your audience and your subject matter**. It would not appear those two terms from chess jargon are widely used enough and understood outside chess circles to become part of the English language, sorry. Kwanzaa wasn’t invented until the 1966s by an African-American and I still wouldn’t have called it an English word until it started appearing in the black newspaper and magazine press in the mid-70s. Even though the seven principles are an intregal part of the holiday (_ujima, umoja, kujichgulia_, etc.) I would definitely italicize them and define them on first reference in any article appearing for a non-African-American audience. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2005, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799/57 "2005-02-15T17:13:21Z")
We do have a word for _Schadenfreude_! It’s _Schadenfreude_. Though I agree with the OP about German having this wonderful way of combining native word elements into new words. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hate-glee-in-which-i-pit-the-inadequacy-of-american-english/289799.md?page=2)