WordWacky

Like many people in the US, I’ve long accepted the definition of Jihad as a Muslim holy war — actual military war sanctified by Allah because it serves Muslim goals.

It turns out that like the Bush Administration, I was wrong. (It may be the only way in which I am like the Bush Administration, but that’s another story.)

This morning on the way to work, I heard this story on my local NPR affiliate, KUOW:

After years of using the word “jihadist” to describe terrorists who carry out attacks against civilians and the U.S. military, the Bush administration has finally realized that doing so actually pays those groups a compliment in the eyes of some Muslims.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Bush administration has relied on terms like “jihadist” and “Islamic extremists.” But jihad has very positive connotations in the Islamic world. It is akin to religious duty: when someone wants to better themselves, they embark on a jihad. Whether it’s to quit smoking, pray more, and in some cases, fight off anyone preventing them from practicing their religion.

Jihad is not, as I have believed, about militarism, but about duty to God. I guess, though I am not much for any of the capitalized deities, I can understand that, if only from the perspective of having the sincere drive to better myself however I can.

Like, for example, being a better blogger, one who posts on a regular basis instead of letting entire weeks pass between posts. I will try harder, I promise, though I am still pretty loathe to call it a blogging jihad.

Here are some etymology posts from the past week:

Gringo/folk etymology - “I’m pretty sure the dictionary is right about the word’s etymology. But I had learned a more colorful story: that Mexican-American vaqueros came into contact with Irish-American cowboys after the United States acquired first Texas, and then New Mexico and California. The Irish cowboys were constantly singing the song, “Green Grow the Lilacs.” The first two words of the song were slurred into gringo.”

Crunk - “Traditionally, crunk meant a hoarse, harsh cry. The term is often used as slang to mean intoxicated. Folk etymology suggests the modern usage of crunk originated as a portmanteau of the words ‘crazy’ and ‘drunk’ or having been ‘cranked up’ to a level of excitability at which one becomes ‘crunk’. Rapper Lil Jon defined crunk as a “state of heightened excitement.”

Good/Bad - “Here’s the Oxford English Dictionary’s etymology for good, which turns out to derive historically from ‘fitting, suitable’, not from ‘noble, aristocratic’…

The American Heritage Dictionary joins in relating good to IE ghedh- ‘to unite, join, fit’, also at the root of together and gather….

And here is the OED’s etymology for bad, which turns out to come not from “lower class” but from ‘homosexual’…”

Hocus - “The two-word phrase ‘hocus pocus’ seems to have entered the language a century or so before the word HOCUS as a stand alone. In medieval times, the Latin words spoken by priests in the Eucharist included ‘hoc est corpus meum,’ meaning ‘this is my body.’”

And more politics, for those so inclined:

Counterinsurgency - “The term counterinsurgency gained currency under President John Kennedy in the 1960’s, and referred initially to countering “communist inspired, supported, or directed insurgency, defined as subversive insurgency” by Soviet-aligned guerillas against western colonial nations. (When the US aided indigent forces in the overthrow of unfriendly governments it was called paramilitary operations.) As in the above quote the US involvement in Vietnam was called a counterinsurgency.”

Yesterday I wrote an e-mail to William Safire, the conservative writer and linguist who has contributed to a column in The New York Times Magazine, “On Language,” since forever. Reading up on him in Wikipedia, I am informed that he graduated from the same high school from which I dropped out. This strikes me as symbolic, though I don’t want to belabor that point too much.

I also found this piece of information:

After voting for Bill Clinton in 1992, Safire became one of the leading critics of Clinton’s administration. Hillary Clinton in particular was often the target of his ire. He caused a mild tempest when he called her a “congenital liar”; Hillary responded that she didn’t feel offended for herself, but for her mother’s sake. According to the president’s press secretary at the time, Mike McCurry, “the president, if he were not the president, would have delivered a more forceful response to that on the bridge of Mr. Safire’s nose.”

My letter was in response to the latter half of this Sunday’s “On Language,” subtitled “Misogynist.” In response to Hillary Clinton’s assertion that she had been subject to misogyny during her campaign, “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by comments and reactions of people who are nothing but misogynists,” Safire wrote:

The word misogyny has since its earliest recording in 1656 meant “hate or contempt for women.” The etymology of misogyny is straightforward: In Greek, miso means “hatred,” and gune means “woman.” A misogynist is a woman-hater. I thought Clinton’s choice of the word was in error, and that the word she meant was sexist, meaning “one who discriminates based on sex” - that she had been treated unfairly because she was a woman. When I looked up the word she chose in the Oxford English Dictionary online, however, I noted that the meaning of misogynist had changed slightly but significantly. In 1989, the definition was “hatred of women”; in the 2002 revision, the definition was broadened to “hatred or dislike of, or prejudice against women.”

Safire does not argue that there has not been “incredible vitriol,” yet he describes his immediate reaction to the word misogyny as incorrect, and only justifies her usage of the word as a synonym for prejudice. Thus, my letter, subject line: vitriol/misogyny.

Mr. Safire:

Relevant definitions of vitriol:

OED Online:
5. Virulence or acrimony of feeling or utterance.

Dictionary.com:
3. something highly caustic or severe in effect, as criticism.

American Heritage:
2. Bitterly abusive feeling or expression.

Worldnet:
2. abusive or venomous language used to express blame or censure or bitter deep-seated ill will

What about “incredible vitriol” does not imply hatred to you? Bitterly abusive? Venomous?

I heard many such press and non-press attacks. Dismiss me as one of Hillary’s feminists if you will, but your column is misguided in implying that vitriol does not suggest hatred, merely prejudice. I understand that you eventually accept the usage, but you imply that it’s politicized.

Perhaps it is your article that is using words to politick.

Having now read the Wikipedia entry on Safire, I would only alter my letter to remove the word “perhaps.”

Update: Here is my response from William Safire, dated June 22, 2008:

Dear Lexicographic Irregular,

You were good to respond to my invitation for comments and suggestions. A great many other readers have pitched in, too. Although I can’t answer mail individually, I read every letter and am most grateful for yours.

Sincerely,

William Safire

The boldface is his.