The Story of English in 100 Words (18 page)

word-coiners (16th century)

The history of English contains thousands of words that never made it – coinages invented by individual writers that simply didn’t catch on. There is just a single instance of
bodgery
recorded in the
Oxford English Dictionary
. It is from the playwright Thomas Nashe, who used it in 1599. It means ‘bungling, botched work’.

Some 16th-century poets and playwrights seem almost to have coined words for a living. Nashe was second only to Shakespeare in the number of words whose first recorded use is found in his writing – nearly 800 – and several did become a permanent part of the language, such as
conundrum, grandiloquent, multifarious
and
balderdash
. Nashe also coined a word which would one day receive new life in science fiction:
earthling
.

But, like Shakespeare, quite a few of his coinages evidently didn’t appeal. Either they were never used by anyone else, as far as we know, or they had a brief flurry of usage before being quietly dropped. Probably no tears would ever be shed over the loss of
collachrymate
(‘accompanied by weeping’) or
baggagery
(‘worthless rabble’). But I rather regret that
bodgery
disappeared (though
bodge
and
bodger
are still heard in some dialects), along with
tongueman
(‘good speaker’) and
chatmate
(‘gossip’).

The list of words that never made it has a surreal
quality. From Philip Sidney we have
disinvite, hang-worthy, rageful
and
triflingness
. From Edmund Spenser,
disadventurous, jolliment, schoolery
and
adviceful
. From John Marston,
cockall
(‘perfection’),
bespirtle
(‘to spot with vice’),
fubbery
(‘cheating’) and
glibbery
(‘slippery’) – creations Lewis Carroll would have been proud of. Sometimes it’s impossible to say why one word stayed and another didn’t. Why did Spenser’s
tuneful
catch on but his
gazeful
did not?

However, you can never tell what will happen.
Musicry
was coined by John Marston, and nobody used it after him – until 1961, when a writer revived it for a book on the arts. Nashe’s
chatmate
is currently the only instance of its use in the
Oxford English Dictionary
. But that will soon change, for in the world of chatrooms, social networking and internet dating, what do we find? Chatmates. There’s hope for
bodgery
yet.

Undeaf

a word from Shakespeare (16th century)

In Shakespeare’s
Richard II
, there’s a scene in which Richard’s uncle, John of Gaunt, expresses the hope that the king will listen to his dying words of advice about ruling more wisely. He wouldn’t listen to me while I was alive, he says, but ‘My death’s sad tale may yet undeaf his ear’ (II.i.16).

Undeaf
. It’s one of those words which must be a genuine Shakespearean coinage. There are over 2,000 words in Shakespeare where the
Oxford English Dictionary
says he is the first recorded user. That doesn’t mean to say he invented all of them. In many cases, he just happened to be the first person we know of to write an already existing word down on a page. The English of his time used an oath
God’s blood –
usually shortened to
’sblood.
The first recorded use is in the first part of
Henry IV
. But people would have been swearing like that for years.

Undeaf
is different. The man and woman in the street wouldn’t have said that. Nor would they since. It’s a vivid way of expressing the idea that Richard needs to listen. Shakespeare could have written ‘My death’s sad tale may open yet his ear’.
Undeaf
has more dramatic impact. Why? Because it’s impossible. If you’re deaf, you can’t suddenly become undeaf. Deep down, John of Gaunt knows that there’s nothing he can say that will change the king’s behaviour.

Now if this were an isolated case, it wouldn’t deserve a chapter in a wordbook. But it’s by no means alone. Shakespeare loves to play with language in this way. He often takes a word and reverses its meaning by adding a prefix like
un-
, even if the action is strictly speaking impossible. In
Macbeth
, Lady Macbeth calls on the spirits to
unsex
her. Later in the same play, Malcolm affirms he is going to
unspeak
what he has said. In
Coriolanus
, the people are asked to
unshout
their earlier shouting.

If we go counting, we’ll find 314 instances in the
Oxford English Dictionary
where Shakespeare is the first citation for an
un-
usage. Most of them are adjectives, such as
uncomfortable
and
uneducated
, but there are no fewer than sixty-two cases where the prefix has been added to an already existing verb. Some of them, such as
unlock, untie
and
unbend
, have become a routine part of the language. But
undeaf
and several others have not.

What Shakespeare does today, the rest of the world does tomorrow. And indeed, it has become a routine feature of creative English expression to make new words by adding a prefix such as
un
-. The language seems to be returning to its Germanic roots, for coinages with
un
- were very common in Old English, and words like
unfriend
(
§36, 99
) have their parallels in
unwine
(‘enemy’, literally
un
+
wine
, pronounced ‘wee-nuh’, ‘friend’). In recent times we have had hundreds of coinages, such as
uncool, unfunny, ungimmicky, unsorry, untouristy, untrendy, un-with-it
and
unyoung
. Unyoung? ‘Why not just say old?’ you might ask. But there’s a difference. Many senior citizens refuse to accept that they are old, though they might reluctantly agree that they are unyoung.

Skunk

an early Americanism (17th century)

In 1585, Thomas Hariot travelled with Sir Walter Raleigh in his attempt to establish a colony on Roanoke Island in Virginia. When he returned to England, he wrote
A Briefe and True Report of the New Found Land of Virginia
, in which he gives a great deal of information about the place and the people. He identifies ‘two kinds of small beasts greater than conies [rabbits] which are very good meat’, naming them
saquenúckot
and
maquówoc
.

People have puzzled over which animals these must have been. Were they raccoons, opossums, muskrats … or even skunks? The first clear use of the name
skunk
doesn’t turn up until 1634, in another account of early America. The
Oxford English Dictionary
derives it from a different Indian language from the one spoken in Roanoke. But
saquenúckot
certainly looks as if it might be the origin of
skunk
.

Skunk
is an early Americanism. It was one of dozens of words that were borrowed from the Algonquian languages in the early 1600s. Many of them didn’t last. Nobody today (except possibly in some dialects) talks about a
sagamore
(‘chief’) or a
pocosin
(‘swamp’). But several words did survive, such as
caribou
,
moccasin
,
moose
,
opossum
,
persimmon
,
powwow
,
tomahawk
,
totem
and
wigwam
. Today there are hundreds of words that distinguish American from British English (
§58
).

It’s sometimes difficult to recognise Indian words in early writings. The indigenous languages were very different from anything Europeans had encountered before, and they had no idea how to spell the words they heard. Captain John Smith arrived in Virginia in 1606 and explored the new territory at length, writing an account of the meetings between the colonists and the local tribes. He’s best known for the famous story of his escape from execution by the Indian chief Powhatan through the intervention of Powhatan’s daughter, Pocahontas. He sent an account of the colony back to England, where it was published in 1608.

His book contains many Amerindian place-names, and at one point – during a visit to the Powhatan Indians – a new noun:

Arriving at Weramocomoco, their Emperour proudly lying uppon a Bedstead a foote high, upon tenne or twelves Mattes, richly hung with Manie Chaynes of great Pearles about his necke, and covered with a great Covering of Rahaughcums.

Rahaughcums
? A little later in his book he spells it
Raugroughcuns
. These are the first brave attempts to write down
raccoons
in English.

Shibboleth

a word from King James (17th century)

The King James Bible, published in 1611, is often called the ‘Authorised Version’ of the Bible because – as it says on its title-page – it was ‘appointed to be read in churches’. Earlier translations of the Bible, such as William Tyndale’s (
§37
), had introduced many new words and idioms into English, but the King James Bible popularised them in a way that hadn’t been possible before.

The team of translators didn’t actually introduce many new words and phrases themselves. They say in their Preface that their job was not to make a new translation, but rather ‘to make a good one better’. They had no choice in the matter, actually, as they’d been given guidelines, approved by King James, which required them to use a previous edition (known as the Bishops’ Bible) as their model. As a result, there are very few words and phrases which actually originate in the text of the King James Bible.

Only forty-three words are currently listed in the
Oxford English Dictionary
as having a first recorded use there. They include several religion-specific expressions, such as
Galilean
(as a noun) and
rose of Sharon
, as well as a few general words, such as
battering-ram, escaper
and
rosebud
. Far more important are the idioms which the Bible popularised: there are over 250, such as
salt of the earth, a thorn in the flesh, root and branch, out of the mouths of babes
and
how
are the mighty fallen
. Their significance in the shaping of English mustn’t be forgotten. Idioms are part of vocabulary too.

Shibboleth
is not among the forty-three, because this word had been used in all the earlier English translations. But there is nonetheless something distinctive about the way it appears in the King James Bible: its spelling.
Shibboleth
appears in the Old Testament Book of Judges. We are told how the regional accent of an unfortunate Ephraimite, who had fallen into the hands of the Gileadites, reveals his origins:

Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan.

The spelling of the word varies in the earlier translations. In John Wycliffe’s version, the Ephraimite seems to have more of a lisp, for he says
Thebolech
instead of
Sebolech
. Other versions have
Schibboleth
and
Scibboleth
. The Geneva Bible and the King James Bible both have
Shibboleth
, and it is this spelling which has prevailed.