absorbent and absorbant and abstergifyignominy and

It dawned on me that not only did I not "cover" pages 1-26 in the first essay (the number of pages I need to "cover" each day if I am to go through the entire dictionary before June 18), but that I didn't even get myself past about page 4. Well, this causes a bit of a dilemma, but I will continue here on pages 1-10. I think that if I really think about it, I would rather have lots of words with vigorous intellectual engagement than complete coverage of the dictionary in a lobotomized state. If that means that I don't "get through" the dictionary and end up returning to Oregon with great ignominy heaped on my shoulders, I suppose I will have to endure it. Let's continue, then.

Removing a Confusion

You recall that Dr. Jeff Kirsch told me that they wouldn't be testing on words that can be spelled in more than one way. So, I when I ran into absorbent and absorbant, I realized that they won't be on the test. So, I don't have to learn to spell the words I just spelled out. Phew. But that creates a bit of a problem, because the word for the ability to absorb radiation mathematically is absorbance while another word for able to absorb is absorbent. But now I am ready for both. Just let them throw them at me; I wil hit 'em out of the park.

There is another little permutation with absorb, however, that caught my attention. The "ratio of the radiant energy absorbed by a body to that incident upon it" (whatever that means) is absorptance. Notice that the "b" has been schlucked up (I don't think that is the correct morphological term) to a "p." Greek has that phenomenon, too, where the so-called labials (P, B, PH) can morph into each other at times. So we also have absorptiometry and, we all know, absorption (which the dictionary wants to make sure we distinguish from adsorption). All right, confusion removed.

But just when you remove one confusion, you run into another. Our dictionary has abulia, a great word meaning "lack of ability to make decisions," but the Century Dictionary has the courtesy to indicate that it is also written aboulia, which is derived directly from the Greek. Indeed, the OED has only the entry under aboulia, with abulia listed immediately after aboulia. I would prefer to write it as aboulia, but for the purposes of this competition, I guess I cannot remain indecisive. I will have to trim my sails and write abulia.

A Detour

But just by going over to the Century Dictionary to check this out I got hung up on some words that were there but not in the Collegiate. Like Moses at the burning bush, I just had to turn aside to see this great sight. The two words were absterge and absterse and their related nouns. They both are derived from the same Latin term and mean the same thing--to cleanse or purify, but I like them better than both "cleanse" and "purify." If you say them aloud it is almost as if you can imagine the washing machine going through the rinse cycle as you say them. Just to give you a delicious example of one of the family of terms--abstergent. It means "anything that aids in scouring or cleansing, as soap or fuller's earth." Ah, just the use of the last two words shows you that the Century Dictionary itself occupies a different mental and experiential world than we do. Nevertheless, we have abstersion, meaning "the act of wiping clean" and abstersive, which means "having the quality of removing foulness." I also love abstergify which means to cleanse or perform one's ablutions. I am afraid, however, if a teacher used this word with students, such as "abstergify your hands," she would be fired.

The "Ac's"

I need to get one word "on paper" right now because otherwise I think it might trip me up. It is the word acanthocephalan. It really is a pretty straightforward-meaning word, and is a "spiny-headed worm." I am pretty sure that if I didn't write it down I might have spelled it acanthocephalon, and if I did this, I would have heard that bell that no one wants to hear. But the word family that tended to pique my interest in the "ac's" had to do with mites and ticks. I guess the Acari are an order of ticks and mites, which I have not devoted too much time to understanding in my life. But it has spawned a ton of words, most of which aren't in the Collegiate. But a few are. Thus, a mite or tick might be an acarid or an acarus and the disease where these critters infest a living entity is called acariasis, but there is only one other word relating to these mites or ticks which our dictionary has. Appropriately so, it is acaricide, which is the word for a pesticide that kills the critters. I am so glad that they have that word in the Collegiate, rather than, say, acarologist-- the guy (or girl) who studies these things, because I think I would be more interested in killing them than studying them, too.

I wonder if there was a split in the editorial board of the 11th Collegiate when they were doing these words? Do you suppose a more scholarly sort on the board might have voted for acarologist but the no-nonsense editorial board chair, who realized that there are lots of people out there who want to kill mites, overruled and said, "It will be acaricide, over my dead body." Indeed, if he was the father of the more scholarly editor, it might have been acaricide or parricide at this point. You never know.

Conclusion

Yikes, I see that I really have not made too much progress so far. The words take me into too many side trips. For example, I wanted to make sure I got the two French words relating to childbirth on the table, accouchement and accoucheur, but I guess I will just have to learn them. And, then I am not able to say anything about the truly useful term accidie (pronounced AK si dee) which is another word for acedia, which is a fancy word for sloth or laziness or apathy. Catholic moral theolgians know the word. Many of them work very hard to learn these medieval terms for sloth.

I am still only on about page 8. I think I will have to go quicker if I want "coverage." But, I generally rebel against the concept of "coverage" as a teacher, believing that if you sink people into some specifics with skill and care then they will learn far more than if they "cover" a field, so I probably will rebel against it here. See you tomorrow.

[Next]