I don’t want to make anyone sick with this video (lest you dislike him), but in it, the Prime Minister Boris Johnson does some political shtick. But as part of that, he uses the Anglish word heartsick instead of the Latinate extremely depressed. What a great word.
© 2022 Bryan A. J. Parry
Leave a Comment » | 
Anglish, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish, Anglo-Saxonism, conlang, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, pure English, Putin's War, Russia, Russia Ukraine War, Saxon English, Saxonism, Ukraine, vocab, War in Ukraine | 
Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
In America they have this thing called “Arbor Day”. It’s where they celebrate the wonder that is the tree. I love trees and celebrate them every day, a big part of my daily walks are just taking in and appreciating the trees. Not sure why we need to wait for the special day. Anyway, they call it “Arbor Day” because “arbor” is Latin for “tree”. But my thought has always been, “why not just call it ‘Tree Day’?”
Speaking of which, we have this word in English “arboretum“. I’ve never understood this word. I mean, the point of it, that is. It’s a “tree yard”, right, so let’s call it a treeyard, because that is what it is.
© 2021 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://www.indianaconnection.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/LOW-RES-arborday.jpg
1 Comment | Anglish, Hidden Words, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish, Anglo-Saxonism, conlang, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, pure English, Saxon English, Saxonism, vocab | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
Here are more words from my notes, another hodgepodge of randomness. These are all words which are attested with these meanings in standard English. Enjoy!
roup Scot, Northern sell by auction, an auction
redden rubefy, tubify
ruddy rubicund
meter ruler, measuring thing
behest command
behindhand opp. of beforehand
beholden under obligation
behoof
befool dupe
beget procreate
belike probably
belittle depreciate
jut projection
-house -ary (in a place sense, mortuary, library)
brawn muscle
© 2020-2021 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/BWs0W-nfu4CXNmZZ8zqhAI6DtLgmfrl-4Ocgc0GL29CPmvWAn1jlXShETa1P0pkbfsXbD42YSZDNW_HXd3UROsRpqH
1 Comment | Anglish, artlang, conlang, Germanic, inkpot, linguistic purism, Old English, Plain English, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish, Anglo-Saxonism, conlang, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, pure English, Saxon English, Saxonism, vocab | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
English has the Latinate word contain. What does contain actually mean? Spanish, a Latin language, also has this verb, contener, yet in Spanish the meaning is self-clear: con “with” + tener “have/hold”. Literally, “with-have” or “with-hold” (although note that “withhold” has quite a different meaning in English).
How do Germanic languages form a word for “contain”? Well, Swedish has inhåller, lit. “in-hold”. Dutch has inhouden, lit. “in-hold”. And German has… enthalten, which means… you get the point.
It’s looking like “inhold” (with the preposition used as a prefix, like “behold”) or “hold in” (with the preposition separate from the word, like “look up”) are the best options.
This glass inholds/holds half a pint in.
Sounds pretty good to me. As does “withinhold” or “hold within”, which perhaps makes the meaning more explicit.
This bucket withinholds/holds a gallon within.
Although, the simpler “hold” and “have” or “can hold/have” would often work better.
This bucket can have/can hold a gallon.
Derived words are easily formed, such as inholder and inholding. Not to forget other words we could use instead, such as “holder” or “box”.
In any case, with the words have and hold, and the Germanic formations inhold and hold in (and/or withinhold and hold within), I think we can do without the Latinish “contain”.
© 2020 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://www.criticalcase.com/file/2017/12/container-vantaggi.png
Leave a Comment » | Hidden Words, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish, artlang, BBC, conlang, Germanic, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, Plain English | Tagged: Andrew Neil, pure English, purism, Saxon English, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
English is so full of it! The word “full”, that is. “Full” is the 513th most common word in the English language. And considering there are over a million words, that’s not bad going.
English likes the word so much that it has been co-opted as a common suffix: –ful.
But did you know that English can use “full” as a kind of sham-prefix, the first element of a compound. Essentially, it produces verbs and adjectives with the same kind of meaning as the self-standing word “full” and the suffix “-ful”, that is, ‘full of, having, or characterised by X’.
Sadly, we haven’t used it productively for a long time. It’s hard to see why, though, given the allwhereness of “full” and “-ful”. Here are some examples from Old and Middle English.
Not all of these formations make much sense in Modern English, but it’s easy to see the power of this kind-of prefix use of “full” and how it could greatly widen and deepen the English wordstock.
Funnily enough, I have ingested one too many tomes of poetry over the years, and have long since been using full-, totally unthinkingly, for years and years. Perhaps I have already been spreading the seed of this affix.
Here are some put-forward words. Add your own!
fullbreach: to violate
fullripe: mature (note that “ripe” mostly fits well for “mature”, although there are cases where “mature” means almost-but-not-quite overripe, and in this sense especially, it seems “fullripe” is a useful word)
full-lasting: lasting the needed length. This is different to longlasting which basically means “durable”.
full-done: completed (successfully)
© 2020 Bryan A. J. Parry
References:
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=-ful
Davies, M. & Gardner, D. (2011) A Frequency Dictionary of Contemporary American English. Routldge, p. 35
Leave a Comment » | Anglish, inkpot, linguistic purism, Plain English, vocab, words | Tagged: anglish, artlang, BBC, conlang, Germanic, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, Plain English | Tagged: Andrew Neil, pure English, purism, Saxon English | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
Why say suspicious when you can say fishy? It’s a much more evocative word! This sense of fishy seems to come from the notion of slipperiness.
© 2020 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://barrylou.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/somethingFishy.jpg
Leave a Comment » | Anglish, artlang, conlang, Germanic, inkpot, Plain English | Tagged: Andrew Neil, anglish, artlang, BBC, conlang, Germanic, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, pure English, purism, Saxon English, Saxonism | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
“John’s so sensitive!”
“Ouch! My teeth are really sensitive!”
If you (or your teeth) are sensitive, it means they have a lot of feeling. They’re really full of feeling. That is, they are feelingful.
“You’re more feelingful than your brother”
“He’s the most feelingful person I know!”
NOT: feelingfuller, feelingfullest. We don’t say “resentfuller” or “beautifullest”.
The negative can be formed with un-: unfeelingful. That is, “insensitive”.
That’s it! A new English word for you formed totally regularly from the tools already available to us.
© 2020 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from http://www.montefioredental.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/00435bab9971eb51bb1271da04831f20.jpg
5 Comments | 1066, Anglish, conlang, Germanic, glossopoeia, inkpot, linguistic purism, vocab, words | Tagged: #PlainEnglish, 1066, 1066 and all that, anglicisation, anglish, Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Saxonism, artlang, conlang, English, feelingful, how we'd talk if William had lost at Hastings, inkpot, linguistic purism, plain English, Roots English, Saxon English, Saxonism | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
Here are two lovely words we don’t hear enough: turnkey and sawbones. We may not hear them much nowadays, but their meaning is clear: “jailor” and “surgeon”. You might have wondered or forgotten why the doctor from the original Star Trek was nicknamed “Bones”; well, here’s the reason. I just cannot get enough of lively words like these that bring a strong image to your mind’s eye. Why use the Latinate, more usual alternatives, when we have this kind of brilliant language to use instead?
© 2020 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from http://www.treknews.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/deforest-kelley-bones-star-trek.jpg
Leave a Comment » | Anglish, conlang, linguistic purism, Uncategorized, vocab, words | Tagged: 1066 and all that, anglish, Anglo-Saxonism, conlang, sawbones, Saxon English, Saxonism, Star Trek, turnkey, vocabulary | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
This little blog of mine, Wrixlings / www.pureenglish.com, regularly gets dozens of hits a day and hundreds of hits a month. Given that I do not advertise this site, and I only tend to update it once or twice a month, and bearing in mind that it centres on a highly niche topic — a pure Saxon English –, I find the readership to be quite unbelievable.
So thank you to everyone who reads and (hopefully) enjoys this website every day! I dream of taking this site to the next level in more ways than one, but I just cannot find the time right now. “Anglish” is a lifetime obsession of mine, a meme I just cannot shake. I hope you all keep up this hobby (?mania) and carry on following this site.
My thanks to you all again!
© 2018 Bryan A. J. Parry
1 Comment | sundry | Tagged: anglish, Anglo-Saxonism, artlang, conlang, linguistic purism, pure English, Saxon, Saxon English, Saxonism, sundry, wrixlings | Permalink
Posted by bryanajparry
Wrixlings 
Quick Comment: Addicting
August 28, 2022Every time I hear the Americanism “addicting”, I am at first momentarily baffled, and then physically sickened. Just say “addictive”!
But let’s set aside our nationalist preferences. We don’t say “sportive” but “sporting/sporty”, so why wouldn’t we say the plainer, albeit not totally Saxon, “addicting”?
© 2022 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://blog.armorgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Tempheader.jpg
Share this:
Like this: