[ExI] wordplay for a tuesday morning

[Dan]

I think there's the rhythm of the language involved. "Black and white," for example, just sounds right as opposed to "white and black." Ditto for "black and blue" versus "blue and black," though there's violation of temporal, logical, or other order as in "head over heels" (doesn't violate but why is that strange?) or "have your cake and eat it" (which I read started as "eat your cake and have it").

I think it's fun to play with these regularities. I said nothing about abandoning them. 

Regards,

Dan
My latest Kindle book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2

> On Sep 30, 2014, at 3:29 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Tara Maya <tara at taramayastales.com> wrote:
>> Apparently the legal doublets in English date back to the centuries right after the Norman conquest, when, in order to be sure your listener understood you, one had to use both an English word and a French or Latin term.  
>> 
>> Some examples that will be familiar: "aid and abet" "over and above" "part and parcel" "terms and conditions" "free and clear" "hue and cry" and on and on… 
>> 
>> So obviously doublings are right and proper and we should neither cease nor desist from using them.  ;)
>> 
>> 
>> Tara Maya
> 
> ​But some of them are just wrong!  Take 'back and forth'.  Clearly one cannot go back without first going forth.  So either use 'to and fro' or change the former to 'forth and back'.  bill w​ 
>> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140930/64dc49f0/attachment.html>