Folding like Darwin's House of Cards?
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:35 pm
I recently spent $100 on two large volumes by Doctors Skousen and Carmack claiming, among other things, that a number of word uses, phrases, and expressions in the Book of Mormon disappeared from English one to three centuries prior to 1830. See The Nature of the Original Language of the Book of Mormon (Parts 3 and 4, Volume III) (hereafter NOL). https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/natu ... tical-text
Imagine my surprise, then, when I learned that in a forthcoming book, Doctors Skousen and Carmack announce that they have determined that 10 of the 39 archaic vocabulary items discussed in the first section of NOL are not actually archaic but persisted through the 1700s. Well now. According to a curious introductory note, the two Doctors had been "hampered by an inability to fully use the Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO) database." "Now," though, "much of that difficulty has been overcome, and [Doctor] Carmack has spent the last year or so reviewing the potentially archaic words, phrases, and expressions discussed in NOL." Here is the introductory note's revealing gloss on this development: "Some of the examples given in NOL did not die out as early as they had proposed. But a good many solid examples still hold up as almost certainly or probably archaic." Well, that doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the Ghost Committee Theory, does it?
Some questions: if the two good Doctors entirely overcome their inability to use the ECCO database, will they drop more items from the archaic vocabulary list? Will the list eventually disappear like a 16th century spirit or fold like Darwin's House of Cards? Should I ask for a refund on my purchase of NOL?
For those keeping score at home:
26 archaic words and phrases
break ‘to stop, interrupt’
but ‘unless, except’
call of ‘need for’
consigned that ‘assigned that’
counsel ‘to consult, counsel with’
course ‘direction’
cross ‘to contradict’
depart ‘to divide, separate, part’
desirous ‘desirable’
devour ‘to consume, eat up’
extinct ‘physically dead’
flatter ‘to coax, entice’
give ‘to describe, portray’
idleness ‘meaningless words or actions’
manifest ‘to expound, unfold’
mar ‘to hinder, stop’
nethermost ‘nethermost’
opinion ‘expectation’
profane ‘to act profanely’
raign ‘to arraign’
scatter ‘to separate from the main group’
sermon ‘conversation, discussion’
study ‘to concentrate thought upon’
subsequent ‘consequent’
welfare ‘success’
whereby ‘why’
10 persistent words
assured ‘sure’
belove ‘to love’
depressed ‘weakened’
detect ‘to expose’
great ‘supreme’
hail ‘to challenge by hailing’
rebellion ‘opposition’
reserve ‘to preserve’
tell ‘to prophesy, foretell’
views ‘visions’
4 re-created words
engraven ‘to engrave’
molten ‘to melt ore’
rent ‘torn or rent part’
scarlets ‘scarlet cloths or clothing’
1 biblical word
may ‘be able to, can’
Imagine my surprise, then, when I learned that in a forthcoming book, Doctors Skousen and Carmack announce that they have determined that 10 of the 39 archaic vocabulary items discussed in the first section of NOL are not actually archaic but persisted through the 1700s. Well now. According to a curious introductory note, the two Doctors had been "hampered by an inability to fully use the Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO) database." "Now," though, "much of that difficulty has been overcome, and [Doctor] Carmack has spent the last year or so reviewing the potentially archaic words, phrases, and expressions discussed in NOL." Here is the introductory note's revealing gloss on this development: "Some of the examples given in NOL did not die out as early as they had proposed. But a good many solid examples still hold up as almost certainly or probably archaic." Well, that doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the Ghost Committee Theory, does it?
Some questions: if the two good Doctors entirely overcome their inability to use the ECCO database, will they drop more items from the archaic vocabulary list? Will the list eventually disappear like a 16th century spirit or fold like Darwin's House of Cards? Should I ask for a refund on my purchase of NOL?
For those keeping score at home:
26 archaic words and phrases
break ‘to stop, interrupt’
but ‘unless, except’
call of ‘need for’
consigned that ‘assigned that’
counsel ‘to consult, counsel with’
course ‘direction’
cross ‘to contradict’
depart ‘to divide, separate, part’
desirous ‘desirable’
devour ‘to consume, eat up’
extinct ‘physically dead’
flatter ‘to coax, entice’
give ‘to describe, portray’
idleness ‘meaningless words or actions’
manifest ‘to expound, unfold’
mar ‘to hinder, stop’
nethermost ‘nethermost’
opinion ‘expectation’
profane ‘to act profanely’
raign ‘to arraign’
scatter ‘to separate from the main group’
sermon ‘conversation, discussion’
study ‘to concentrate thought upon’
subsequent ‘consequent’
welfare ‘success’
whereby ‘why’
10 persistent words
assured ‘sure’
belove ‘to love’
depressed ‘weakened’
detect ‘to expose’
great ‘supreme’
hail ‘to challenge by hailing’
rebellion ‘opposition’
reserve ‘to preserve’
tell ‘to prophesy, foretell’
views ‘visions’
4 re-created words
engraven ‘to engrave’
molten ‘to melt ore’
rent ‘torn or rent part’
scarlets ‘scarlet cloths or clothing’
1 biblical word
may ‘be able to, can’