Stubborn By Any Other Name
I never use the word 'calcitrant', even in my most creative spurts of verbiage, because it is, after all, not a word. How, then, I wondered recently, could one having never been calcitrant, be recalcitrant--the word I originally intended to use? And so I erased that word in my haughty paragraph and replaced it with 'incalcitrant.' And yet, that didn't seem right, either; maybe it wasn't even a word at all. This is what I found out that set my etymological mind at rest:
"The word incalcitrant is often used in Modern English, and is understood by native speakers to mean something like 'stubborn,' 'resistant,' 'uncooperative' (a Google search on incalcitrant brought 193 results, all with this meaning). Yet incalcitrant does not appear in any dictionaries that I have consulted. Incalcitrant appears to be related to the word recalcitrant, whose Webster's (Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1991) definition is as follows:
1. Obstinately defiant of authority or restraintHeck. Next time maybe I'll just confess that I'm stubborn and leave it at that.2. a: Difficult to manage or operate b: Not responsive to treatment
3. Resistant
Comments
Fred,
I have struggled with the word 'disgruntled'. How can one be disgruntled without ever being gruntled?
Posted by: Ken | January 2, 2006 10:55 AM
Well I never heard of the word, calcitrant, until I read your post. But even with my lack of education, it looks like we use the last part of the word a lot "ranting" in blogdom. So with the "New word everyday calendar" I got for Christimas, I would say your word is "de minimis." That is my new word.
Posted by: osray | January 2, 2006 1:23 PM
I've often used this as an exercise in my online English Grammar classes: how many words can you brainstorm that have a prefix but whose stem is *not* a word, like disgruntled/gruntled.
My mostly English-major students have some fun coming up with examples.
Imagine my dismay, then, to discover that "uncouth" has been removed from the list of eligibles now that "couth" is in the dictionary (listed as "back formation" of "uncouth"):
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/couth
Posted by: Lorianne | January 3, 2006 7:16 AM
yes indeed. but i'll stick with being sistant and sponsive.
Posted by: susannah eanes | January 4, 2006 4:35 PM