If you want X, you know where to find it (was Re: do...until wisdom needed...)
Douglas Alan
nessus at mit.edu
Thu Apr 19 17:58:40 EDT 2001
"Alex Martelli" <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:
> > Surely a man of your intelligence, Alex, knows that outright insults are
> > not the only way to be abusive?
> "Invective", sure; that is what a (well-constructed) flamewar is.
> Merriam-Webster clarifies usage by noting that "invective" "suggests
> greater verbal and rhetorical skill and may apply to a public
> denunciation", while "abuse" "stresses the harshness of the
> language" -- seems a well-drawn explanation to me.
My dictionaries disagree with your dictionary. My Webster says that
abuse "stresses harshness and unfairness of verbal attack". It is the
*attack* that must be "harsh" for words to be "abusive" -- the words
themselves do not need to be harsh. My American Heritage says "to
assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words". Notice the
word "or" in this definition; the words do not need to be "coarse" to
be "abusive" -- "contemptuous" or "insulting" will do.
"Abuse" and "invective" are not mutually exclusive terms. "Invective"
is more specific, while "abuse" is more inclusive.
|>oug
More information about the Python-list
mailing list