Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2017 December 16

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 16

Entitled

Every time I hear the word "entitled" these days, it's used in the sense of "a person who acts as if he has an entitlement, but does not actually have such an entitlement". Here are a couple of examples: [1], [2].

It's a sarcastic or ironic usage that seems to have virtually replaced the standard usage of "a person who has an entitlement". I'm almost afraid to say "I'm entitled to X" for fear of people thinking I'm confessing arrogance and bratitude.

What's this process of meaning reversal called, and are there other examples? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

I'd consider this a case of pejoration. 169.228.156.206 (talk) 19:40, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:56, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

A few vaguely similar words come to mind. Righteous is a word I normally hear used to mean "self-righteous", which is pretty close to the opposite of the original meaning; for all I know the devout may still use the word in the original sense but I don't meet many of them. Deathless is usually a sarcastic insult used in expressions like deathless prose. I'm open to contradiction, but I get the impression that the phrase hoi polloi is normally used in the United States now to mean "the elite", which sounds very odd to us English and presumably to the Greeks as well. It's hard to remember that Sherlock was ever used to mean "a person who investigates mysteries or shows great perceptiveness" as the OED insists, rather than coming after no shit. Charming and tough, used as exclamations, are both 180 degrees around from the original sense. The verb coin, when used in to coin a phrase, also reverses its meaning.

I'm reminded of the story that James II (or someone) described St Paul's Cathedral as being "amusing, awful and artificial", by which he meant "pleasing, awe-inspiring and skilfully achieved". --Antiquary (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Well now, it seems St Paul's was actually called "very artificial, proper and useful". Shame! --Antiquary (talk) 13:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Antiquary -- in "to coin a phrase", the metaphor is more or less of a machine in the mint striking a planchet, after which a nice shiny new coin rolls out at the bottom; I'm not sure what the reversal is. (P.S. I just discovered that the words planchet and planchette have very different meanings.) AnonMoos (talk) 15:33, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, yes, but instead of a nice shiny new phrase, the speaker invariably produces a mouldy old cliche. Henry^Flower 16:20, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, invariably or very nearly so. The OED's definition of to coin a phrase reads, in full, "an expression commonly used ironically to introduce a cliché or a banal sentiment". --Antiquary (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

However, such a reversal only applies to the specific infinitive construction "to coin a phrase" as a whole. It would not apply in "She coined a phrase" etc, and really has nothing to do with the individual verb word "coin"... AnonMoos (talk) 23:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

It's used to mean the opposite of what it says. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

However, the individual word "coin" does not reverse meaning, as implied in the comment of 13:33, 17 December 2017 above... AnonMoos (talk) 16:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

The OED also reckons the usual modern meaning of egregious, "conspicuously bad or wrong" (first attested 1566), arose out of an ironic use of its previous meanings, "distinguished", "eminent", "remarkably good" etc. --Antiquary (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

"Notorious"[3] and "awful"[4] used to be good things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:45, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Antiquary, this American's never heard hoi polloi with any other meaning than the standard. Nyttend (talk) 03:18, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Fowler tells us that the reverse meaning is well-attested, albeit not acknowledged in dictionaries. He notes that it is "not confined to the USA" (which suggests it's mainly an American phenomenon), and cites an instance from the 1960s. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:59, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

• Then there's Ivan the Terrible. The connotation is quite different from, say, "Donald the Terrible". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:57, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  When I was a kid, I read about Oz, the Great and Terrible. I was confused. If he was great, how could he be terrible? --Trovatore (talk) 20:11, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  The term "terrible" used to mean "to fill with awe or dread".[5] That usage was probably kind of misleading by 1939, which is probably why Frank Morgan's wizard said, "I am Oz, the great and powerful." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:16, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  It's interesting how "awful" and "awesome" diverged widely in meaning -- one meaning "very bad" and the other meaning "very good", although originally they simply meant "full of awe, awe-inspiring". So did "terrible" and "terrific". --79.237.86.208 (talk) 04:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

  Although "awfully" and "awesomely" are often still synonyms. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:04, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• @Antiquary: I have never heard hoi polloi to mean the elite, although I usually do hear "the hoi polloi". I suspect there is a confusion between hoi polloi and high falutin which are very close phonetically: /hoi PəlV:-/ and /hai FəlV:-/. μηδείς (talk) 05:41, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and there's also "hoity toity". μηδείς (talk) 05:57, 23 December 2017 (UTC)