Subject | Re: Calumet files Chapter 7 |
From | James Silverton |
Date | 03/29/2014 16:43 (03/29/2014 11:43) |
Message-ID | <lh6pni$v2m$1@dont-email.me> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Tony Cooper |
Tony CooperThis being Saturday, I actually raised the energy to find out the difference between "Chapter 7" and Chapter 11".
On Sat, 29 Mar 2014 06:52:03 -0500, Neil Ellwood <cral.elllwood2@btopenworld.com>wrote:Neil EllwoodTony Cooper
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 09:36:31 -0700, Savageduck wrote:SavageduckNeil Ellwood
On 2014-03-28 16:08:51 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> said:Tony CooperSavageduck
On 28 Mar 2014 06:23:43 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:Tony CooperFor example, a while back you said you provided an "onslaught" of substantiation about something or other. I accept "onslaught" as a word, and it's in the dictionary, but not with the meaning you seemed to have in mind.Sandman
Yes, I know you're ignorant about the word "onslaught".
onslaught noun - a fierce or destructive attack: a series of onslaughts on the citadel. - a large quantity of people or things that is difficult to cope with
Note, particularly, example number 2.
If you found that definition, and still feel that "onslaught" is the right word choice to describe a few cites of supposed "substantiation", then your case is more hopeless than I first thought.
Perhaps a virtual inundation of substantiations was meant to imply a metaphoric onslaught. ...maybe a flood, or even a plethora of substantiations might end up described so?
The word 'onslaught' is just one of a myriad number that have a dictionary definition but is more often used in many other ways. I have 2 dictionaries and both have the same definition ( one was bought for me in 1944 (Nuttalls) and the other is a Readers Digest concise from about 1998.
Just because a word has a regular dictionary definition does not mean that any other meaning is wrong, thus the way onslaught is often (even usually) used is to mean the start or beginning of something.
I have never seen or heard "onslaught" used to describe the start or beginning of something. The word for that would be "onset". It's possible that people hearing "onset" used think they are hearing "onslaught" and use "onslaught" in the future with this meaning.
It's almost an eggcorn. An eggcorn is a word or phrase that results from mishearing the original word and creating a new word or phrase containing something of the original. Geoffrey Pullum, the linguist who coined the term, used "eggcorn" because in his initial study he found "acorn" misheard as "eggcorn".
It's not a true eggcorn because, in this case, it's just a switch of words.Neil Ellwood
Language matures and onslaught has been like this for as long as I can remember.