tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post113016199358671301..comments2024-03-28T08:41:17.341-04:00Comments on <center> Ralph the Sacred River </center>: Embetter: Perfectly CromulentEdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05188482189638751204noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1131144815632745832005-11-04T17:53:00.000-05:002005-11-04T17:53:00.000-05:00I agree with theswain that this one was hit foul. ...I agree with theswain that this one was hit foul. Accepting new words when good ones exist (in this case even built on the same root), needlessly embloats the language.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130441193422712172005-10-27T15:26:00.000-04:002005-10-27T15:26:00.000-04:00On the other hand, there already exists the verb "...On the other hand, there already exists the verb "better" most often used in infinitive form "to better". <BR/><BR/>I'll also add that "better" is the comparative form of either good or of well. I can not think of a comparative + EN formation.<BR/><BR/>Thus, unless I'm wrong and I may be, I'd say the construction is "incorrect" in that forming a verb off a comparative by adding EN is not a typical English word formation strategy nor is EN a verb intensifier in English. He didn't take an adjective and make a verb, and he didn't create a verb to cover a situation in which none exists.theswainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05919025515524894537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130333550326415732005-10-26T09:32:00.000-04:002005-10-26T09:32:00.000-04:00Actually, perhaps one can say that [ADJ] + -en = i...Actually, perhaps one can say that [ADJ] + -en = intransitive, ingressive, such as "lighten"; while en- + ADJ + -en = transitive, causative, such as "enlighten." Therefore we may posit such a form as *biggen, "to become big." Also in the Simpsons is attested the form "dumbening," from "dumben," to become dumb, and we may posit a transitive form *endumben, "to make dumb," ex. "Reading this blog will really endumben you."EMChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02505525490002421093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130240312093019412005-10-25T07:38:00.000-04:002005-10-25T07:38:00.000-04:00This etymology is in fact better than the usual on...This etymology is in fact better than the usual one (opposite of embitter), I think; the word has in fact already become quite popular. Need one demonstrate that the speaker or his speech-writer watched the Simpsons shows, or is general usage sufficient as proof? If there is no -en, one does not hear the echo of "The Holy Spirit enlightens...", of course (which proves your point about em- and en-, Ed!). By the way, isn't "Noble and Holy Spirit" somewhere in the Roman Missal? Jan-Wim Wesselius, Theological University of Kampen, The NetherlandsJan-Wim Wesseliushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07744228692215821862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130173202477006162005-10-24T13:00:00.000-04:002005-10-24T13:00:00.000-04:00Ah yes ... according to Professor Frink, that woul...Ah yes ... according to Professor Frink, that would be an example of "non-contiguous affix compounding."EMChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02505525490002421093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130170828956196832005-10-24T12:20:00.000-04:002005-10-24T12:20:00.000-04:00Great post but I'm wondering now... how do you und...Great post but I'm wondering now... how do you understand the form *biggen? Is it a doubling of last consonant to preserve the short vowel with an *-en a suffix?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9396860.post-1130170300456038072005-10-24T12:11:00.000-04:002005-10-24T12:11:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com