Digressions on "Digestion": Fourth Week

An interesting word from this week is “digestion.” A common word to modern ears, digestion is popularly understood to be the breaking down of food in the stomach and intestines for processing by the body, for the purpose of nutrition. It was known this way in Johnson’s day, too, and so reflected in his dictionary. Interestingly, “concoct” was used in a nearly identical way in the period. This closely reflected its Latin base: concŏquo, meaning, according to Cassell’s, “to boil or cook thoroughly or together.” Though today, one does not normally hear a person say he is concocting his dinner to indicate digestion, the idea of reducing matter in the stomach as digestion is certainly apt and rather illustrative. 

Before continuing with the usages of “digestion,” an important point to emphasize is Johnson’s reliance on and closeness to Latin. By far, the majority of the words that I have been proofing lately have a Latin etymological base (especially after leaving words beginning with the Greek preposition δια, such as diameter). The literary quotes Johnson uses strongly suggest how closely tied to Latin the writers of old were. This is not unexpected when one realizes how commonly Latin was used in the English-speaking world, and not just by ecclesiastics, from medieval times through the eighteenth and into the nineteenth centuries. It is only in more modern times that Latin has been relegated to technical scientific terminology and esoteric studies in the dusty halls of academe. 

Continuing with “digestion,” the next usage Johnson gives is: “The preparation of matter by chemical heat.” Perhaps humorous to contemporary ears is Johnson’s use of a quote here from Bacon’s Natural History that invokes alchemy as an example of digestion, “We conceive, indeed, that a perfect good concoction, or digestion, or maturation of some metals, will produce gold.” Alchemy, now known to be a futile pursuit, was considered sound scientific practice in ages past – even a scientific mind as eminent as Newton’s strenuously sought a way to produce gold by chemical means. Again, it is uncommon to hear “digestion” used to mean preparation by chemical heat, thus it is labelled “Obsolete” by the OED. 

The next use of “digestion” is, “Reduction to a plan; the act of methodizing; the maturation of a scheme.” The idea here is taking divergent but interconnected parts and synthesizing them into a streamlined whole. Has the reader ever wondered why a very popular multivolume set of condensed books are called Reader’s Digest? Reducing a book’s contents to its most salient points can be termed “digestion.” Historically important, the ancient body of Roman jurisprudence codified into book-form was titled the Digest. 

The last use of “digestion” in Johnson’s Dictionary is of a “wound or sore” producing “matter.” “Matter” regards suppuration or the formation of pus. This process was considered a healthy maturing of a wound toward healing. It is now known that suppuration is caused by infection, which is best avoided from the beginning and is a detriment rather than a help. Wounds made and kept clean heal the quickest and are least likely to form potentially lethal complications. Medical knowledge and understanding, however, was not this advanced in Johnson’s day. Nor would it be for nearly two hundred years. Such ignorance has had profound historical consequences. 

President Washington’s life was almost certainly shortened by the “blood-letting” thought so necessary in 1799. Though eighty-two years had elapsed since Washington’s death, medical practices were still woefully in the dark; causing another presidential death. President James A. Garfield was shot by an assassin on July 2, 1881. Garfield suffered for weeks because his doctors could not find or remove the bullet lodged in his body – x-ray was unknown in his day. Not only were the doctors unable to remove the bullet, but they also lacked a proper knowledge of germs and the causes of infection. All of these shortcomings resulted in the President’s untimely death on September 19, 1881.

Until next time.

John

Context and Connections: Third Week

For this week's post I would like to explore a process, more than an individual word. And an important process it is. The basic investigation to determine context when studying a text is fundamental. A useful adage in this regard is that any text taken out of context becomes a mere pretext -- a groundless assertion. Worthy historical research cannot be accomplished without finding, then submitting to the boundaries of context. This brief article will be an exercise of just such an excursion.

Let us begin with Johnson's entry: "dier." The lexicographer designates this as a noun meaning "One who follows the trade of dying; one who dies cloaths." Johnson offers two quotes using the word. The last is attributed to "Arbuthnot on Coins" and it is here that our work begins. The quotation is this: "There were some of very low rank and professions, who acquired great estates: coblers, diers, and shoemakers gave publick shows to the people" (original spelling and punctuation retained).

It is easy to assume Arbuthnot is writing of times contemporary to Johnson's dictionary (1755). Is Arbuthnot talking about Johnson's time or his own or neither? Certainly there were "coblers, diers and shoemakers" in Johnson's day. This fact makes it very easy to fall into the trap of our earlier assumption. How can we avoid this trap? How can we act rationally? To find the answers we must dig deeper.

The first step of the quest is to find an original text of Arbuthnot's work on coins. Since one's local public library is not likely to hold many volumes from 1755 or earlier, another depository will need to be consulted. The place I like to turn is Internet Archive. Here I found John Arbuthnot's book: Tables of Ancient Coins, Weights and Measures, Explain'd and Exemplify'd In Several Dissertations; published 1727. To find the passage quoted by Johnson, I used the text search function of the website. I chose a word from the quote that seemed unique. My first search with "cobler" was unsuccessful. I moved on to "diers" and "shoemakers." These all failed. I finally tried "rank" which worked. On page 118, I found my quote. A little reading revealed that Arbuthnot was speaking of the tradesmen of ancient Rome. He elucidates the sort of tradesman he has in mind, "Vatinius a shoemaker's apprentice gave to Nero himself a famous spectacle of gladiators at Beneventum, of whom Tacitus, saith . . ." "Nero," "gladiators" and "Tacitus" are context pointers that clearly set the time and place as Rome in the reign of Nero (54 to 68 AD).

 

The "coblers, diers and shoemakers" were not of London or of some other town in England, but hundreds of miles away and many centuries removed from Arbuthnot's day. The quote taken out of the context built by the author could easily have been misconstrued to say the text was describing England in the eighteenth century.

One may ask what difference there is between a dier of the first century and one of the eighteenth. Time makes the biggest difference. Place matters and material differences matter. The differences are as abrupt and significant as the differences between first century Rome and eighteenth century England. The sharp contrasts between ancient Rome and Johnson's England highlight how wrong one could be by exploring Johnson's quote without first determining its original context.

 

Understanding context helps us grasp Johnson's intent, the deeper meaning of his use of the quote and how that relates to the word; its history and use. The long span of centuries contemplated by the dictionary entry shows that the practice of dyeing cloth is an old one, indeed. The life of the word’s concept is long and rich. But more importantly, Johnson is making a connection between the dier of Rome and the dier of England. If there were no basic correlations amidst their many differences, using the quote would have been useless to Johnson's audience. The context reveals a connection, albeit a basic and foundational one, between the English of Johnson's day the Roman citizen of old. Revealing and explaining such connections are the very essence of teaching and studying history. That is history's greatest power. It is by the pathway of connections made manifest that history teaches us its lessons and makes us wiser today.

Until next time.

John

I put a link to Arbuthnot's book in the list to the right.

Into the Work: Second Week

As the title explains, the second week of work on the Johnson's Dictionary Online Project has been time to begin the work in earnest. I have been able to concentrate proofing rather than preparatory tasks, such as consumed the beginning days -- days of application not preparation.

This puts me in mind of two words I inspected this week: "dial-plate" and "dialist." Contemporary readers would likely consider these words odd indeed. To the eighteenth century Englishman, "dial-plates" and "dialist[s]" were part of the times' greatest scientific and technological advances. By this, I make reference to John Harrison, a contemporary of Johnson, and his marine chronometers. Space constraints prevent a thorough history of these time-keeping marvels but suffice it to say that they were of immense importance in their day and to ours. Without Harrison's contribution to time-keeping, mankind would still be floundering in the oceans to discover their longitude at sea. Latitude is relatively easy to determine at sea with simple instruments and a seaman's knowledge. Not so with longitude. Before satellites and GPS, being able to maintain accurate time aboard ship was absolutely critical in finding one's longitude. By accurately maintaining the local time of the ship's launch port and the local time, while aboard ship, the two times can be used to calculate longitude. Accurate time-keeping is taken for granted today, but in Johnson's day accurately setting and keeping of time was practically unknown.

One may well ask what longitude and chronometers have to do with the two words cited earlier. They are alike in that the earlier words are horological terms -- clockmaking words. Johnson writes that a "dial-plate" is, "That on which hours or lines are marked." In current terms -- a clock-face. Though today, the idea of a clock-face with hour markings has rather sadly become as foreign to modern imaginations as "dial-plate" and "dialist" are. As some have probably already guessed, a "dialist" is one who makes dials (particularly sundials). A "dial-plate" maker then would be a kind or form of "dialist."

International shipping and navigation on the world's oceans is such an integral part of modern life and the supplying the commodities that sustain life, little thought is given to what efforts were made and even lives lost to make safe the seas. In like manner, accurate clocks (every smartphone has one or more) are taken for granted, though for thousands of years before our extremely limited modern era, most people considered time in broad terms; often limited to sunrising, noontide and sunsetting. 

Yet again, lexicography and history have joined hands to lend us a perspective that is interesting and informative, but more importantly engenders further reasons to be grateful to our forbears. Forbears that prepared and applied their knowledge and time, from whom we enjoy so many blessings today.

For those who would like to know more about the Harrison timekeepers and early chronometers, I have added a link on the right to the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. I also recommend Dava Sobel's excellent small volume Longitude as a good place to begin exploring the world of accurate clockmaking. 

Until next time.

John

Beginnings: First Week

This has been the beginning of our individual assignments for the Johnson's Dictionary Online Project. I have been assigned as a proofreader. My work consists of comparing database entries with a scanned copy of an original 1755 edition of the dictionary. If any errors are found in the online entry the error is noted and described on the project's shared ".xlsx" file. All of the proofreading participants share the same Google file that is updated in real time as entries are checked and errors noted. It is easy to tell who is working at the same time you are by noting whose names are shown at the top of the Google page. The shared format reinforces the community spirit and team effort being brought to the project.

My entries started with "deuce." This English word comes from the French "deux." The English and the French have the same usage: "two." However, English usage also includes "devil" which the French does not. When used to indicate "devil" or "the devil," Johnson gives the alternate spelling "deuse" which is used only for this meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary offers that "deuce," meaning "devil," may have come from the German "daus" or Low German "duus." To add more complexity to this little word with a small meaning, the Old French word for two was spelled "deus." Since the French words were not used to signify "devil," the German etymology seems the more compelling. This example shows that even little words with limited usages can have complex and often convoluted histories.

At this juncture it might be useful to offer a fine adage I learned long ago: "Dictionaries give possible usages, context gives meanings." Our word "deuce" is an apt example. When "deuce" is found in a reading one must determine how it is used and thus, its meaning. Is it used to indicate "two" or "devil?" Reason indicates that it will not be both. Context must be ascertained to discover the meaning. Practice will make this process quite automatic; it is an ability well worth developing.

Another interesting word from this week is "Deuteronomy." This word is certainly not new to those familiar with the English translations of the Hebrew Old Testament. One might suppose that this word is the Hebrew title of the fifth book of the Bible. It is not. "Deuteronomy" comes from the Septuagint, the third century B.C. Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Johnson correctly states that the word is a compound of the Greek root δεύτερος, meaning second and νόμος, meaning law. The Greek compound, δευτερονόμιον is found at Deu. 17:18. Some have taken this to mean a "second law," another law -- which is even suggested by Johnson's definition. The text of the book, however, is not the giving of a separate law, but a reiteration of that already given. Thus, the English translation follows the original Hebrew and uses "copy" rather than second (cf. Joshua 8:32). Once more, context (coupled with historical Hebrew usage) is everything.

I suppose it might fairly be said that the history of words is the history of everything, for how do we communicate the past but through words? Lexicography is a foundational subject which opens many doors of knowledge and understanding.

Until next time.

John