“A custom more honored in the breech than the observance.”
I know what these two phrases mean. I understand them, deep down in the gut level. But I can’t articulate their meanings to WhyKid. (Yes, we have strange conversations on the way to school.)
It doesn’t help that he’s a very literal, linear thinker, destined to one day become an engineer or architect, and I’m a rather “floral” thinker. We both speak English, nominally, except he speaks the “Literalease” and I speak “Metaphor and Allegory” dialects.
Any translators out there? He’s 11, if that helps.
QtM, thanks for the link, but it’s WAY too complicated for an 11 year old. Even a brilliant, wise and handsome thinker like WhyNot.
But maybe a summation and example like, “If an exception is listed, that tells us that there is a contrary rule about the same topic”
But so far I can only think on one example, and it’s a messy one because it seems to indicate no rule: if there’s a “No Parking” sign on Main Street,we can assume parking is allowed anywhere there isn’t a sign. (But isn’t allowed parking a “no-rule”, not a rule?)
Oh! I think I just thought of one: “You may play your GameBoy for 20 minutes after your homework is done on school nights.” This exception insinuates that GameBoy is not to be played before homework is done or for extended periods of time on school nights, without actually stating the rule. These circumstances provide an exception which indicates that a larger rule must exist for them to “except.”
I don’t believe so. As ultrafilter said, “prove” here does not mean “demonstrates that a rule exists.” It means “test.” If you make an exception, the nature of the exception you’re making will test the value of the rule or how seriously you’re going to take it.
So, if you say you’ve got a rule – say at a restaurant “no reservations: first come, first served” – but then the proprietor seats celebrities and acquaintances while making others wait. These exceptions tell you something about the rule.
Good point. But I can think of plenty of customs that are more honoured in the breech … The custom of going to work for example. Much more honoured in the breech than out of the breech.
I enjoyed Cecil’s column on “exeption that proves the rule,” but I think he gave up too quickly. Every time I hear it it’s used when someone’s lame generalization has been shot down by a counterexample. Often the theories are very lame.
Bigot: All persons of ethnicity X have characteristic Y.
You: Joe is X, but not Y.
Bigot: Well, he’s the exception that proves the rule!
As Cecil originally said, It’s one step up from “Screw YOU!,” but not a very big step.
I’ve never heard it used in the “prove=test” mode outside of the column.
The way I’ve seen “That is a custom more honored in the breach (breaking) than the observance” used is, there is supposed to be such a custom but few follow it.
My grandmother might have told you as a young lady to wear white gloves in San Francisco, but that custom was little followed even at that time.
Coming to a full stop at an arterial stop sign is another example.
