Yet again, the dim-sighted Little Ed has tarnished the polish on Uncle Cecil’s writings. In the final paragraph of Taking another shot, we see the phrase “simply wave that right away”. Our esteemed Cecil undoubtedly meant “simply waive that right away”.
Please fix this error quickly.
Bye bye, right.
It took 18 years for anyone to notice it. You really think fixing it’s that urgent?
IT’s not even a mistake.
You can waive something, or you can wave something away.
You don’t “waive things away”. Not an error.
You’re kidding, right?
You’re actually proposing that it makes sense to physically move a right? Or to gesture with ones hands at a right? It’s an abstract noun; you can’t move it or gesture to it.
However, you can certainly waive a right, as in relinquish it.
Pretty sure that “wave” was used in the sense of "hand-wave,"and it’s a metaphorical hand-wave at that. The paragraph of which you speak, up to the “offending” sentence, reads as follows:
To “waive” a right, as in “relinquishing” it, is to “give it up.” The implication being that it would be “given up” by the people who enjoy it.
The hypothetical brought up by Unca Cece deals with the right being abrogated out of existence by the entity that wishes for those people to no longer enjoy that right. That’s not “relinquishing” (or “waiving”) that’s “waving it away.”
Of course you can, but the expression is never ‘waive away’, because that makes no sense.
Here is what Merriam-Webster says about wave:intransitive verb
1: to motion with the hands or with something held in them in signal or salute
2: to float, play, or shake in an air current : move loosely to and fro : flutter <flags waving in the breeze>
3 of water : to move in waves : heave
4: to become moved or brandished to and fro <signs waved in the crowd>
5: to move before the wind with a wavelike motion <field of waving grain>
6: to follow a curving line or take a wavy form : undulate
transitive verb
1 : to swing (something) back and forth or up and down
2 : to impart a curving or undulating shape to <waved her hair>
3 a : to motion to (someone) to go in an indicated direction or to stop : signal <waved down a passing car>
b : to gesture with (the hand or an object) in greeting or farewell or in homage
c : to dismiss or put out of mind : disregard —usually used with aside or off
d : to convey by waving <waved farewell>
4 : brandish, flourish <waved a pistol menacingly>
And here is what it says about waive:1 archaic : give up, forsake
2 : to throw away (stolen goods)
3 archaic : to shunt aside (as a danger or duty) : evade
4 a : to relinquish voluntarily (as a legal right) <waive a jury trial>
b : to refrain from pressing or enforcing (as a claim or rule) : forgo <waive the fee>
5 : to put off from immediate consideration : postpone
6 [influenced by wave] : to dismiss with or as if with a wave of the hand <waived the problem aside>
7 : to place (a ball player) on waivers; also : to release after placing on waivers
I think that definitions 4a, 4b, and 6 of waive are all reasonable in this context. I suppose one could argue that wave 3c (transitive) fits the context, but it looks ignorant when there’s a better word that’s very similar to the one used.
You’ll have to explain further, because I don’t see anything wrong with “waive away”. English often uses adverbs to supplement verbs; why can’t “waive” use one?
wouldn’t ‘waive away’ be “to throw away away”?
Would you REALLY say “I give up away my rights” or “I relinquish voluntarily away my rights”?
On the other hand, expressions sometimes get shortened; it makes perfect sense (as others have already said) to say “Let’s [hand] wave that away.”
you can waive with a wave.
Yes, the phrase in question is ambiguous enough that either word makes sense. It’s also ambiguous enough for someone to question the usage. Perhaps that was intentional, though if it was meant to ferment discussion, it took a long time for that to happen.
Only machine translators try to do simple substitution, because language doesn’t work that way.
Cecil’s wordcraft is right up there with the best of them. some of the world’s best is buried deep waiting to be recognized.
Yeah, as in “Colorless green ideas slept furiously.”
“Wave away” is a normal English idiom that makes perfect sense here. “Waive away” is clumsy, and inappropriate to both the rhetoric and logic of the context. (It is no attack upon the constitution process to waive a right; there is a right to waive a right. But a right ought never to be waved away.)
Both “waive away” and “wave away” are used in natural english speech. Frankly, I don’t care for either one. The article should say either, “wave that right good-bye” or “waive that right.” “Wave that right away” makes it sound like the constitution is a waiter. Ugh.
You could not be more wrong. You could try, but you would not be successful.
I don’t find ‘waive away’ being used commonly at all.
Perhaps, but the phrase was used in the negative - implying that it’s not just something to be waved away like a waiter. Doesn’t that actually make perfect sense?
See, this is what I don’t understand - you appear to have a good grasp of how language works, except back in post 6, you can only imagine an absolutely literal, physical interpretation of an idiom: