Emergency’s emergence from redundance to relevancy
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://www.etymonline.com/columns/post/a-cy-of-troubles
1 Like
I agree that Latin has many faults (firstly to be a torture instrument inflicted upon so many inculpable pupils against their will), but honestly we cannot blame everything upon it.
In particular I’m firmly convinced that Latin is completely innocent in the case of the ‘-ce-cy’ dilemma: for instance it only offers a single inambiguous ‘ēmĭnentĭa,-æ’ that (at least phonetically) looks more likely to having given birth to ‘eminency’ than to ‘eminence’.
So who is the culprit of such a troublesome split? I have no idea, Your Honour.
Still while reading your article and pondering on an improbable general criterion to differentiate between the ‘-ce/-ces’ and the ‘-cy-cies’ I sensed the pale shade of a faint possibility looming in the air.
Do consider for example an expression of academic disagreement such as “In my opinion the inconsistence of your arguments is second only to their lack of sense” (short for “you’re talking gibberish”) against a still scholarly but slightly more brusque “Would you please cease to utter inconsistencies?” (short for "cut the bullshit!").
In the former case inconsistence represents the primary quality of the opponent’s arguments, while in the latter the inconsistencies are the inconsistent arguments themselves.
The same goes for “the eminence of your position protects you from…” (“no, they won’t put you in jail”) against “Yes, your Eminency, certainly!” (“Sure, you are the Bishop”).
Far fetched? Probably yes.
Could that be a general rule? Probably not - rules, in English??? 