On 2004/08/07, at 3:47, Paul Stone wrote: > Scientifically speaking there is an attractive "force" between two=20 > masses > which is roughly equal to the equation of Newton's Gravitational=20 > constant > (G) times (the two masses m =3D mass one, M =3D mass two) over the = square=20 > of > the distance between their centres. Predictable eh? Mightn't one assert, however, that a reader who construes Weil's=20 "gravity" and "grace" by turning to Newton for the proper sense to=20 apply to "gravity" is guilty of a willful misreading? Turning to the Oxford English Dictionary, one finds that the English=20 "gravity" was derived from the Latin (gravis, gravitatem, gravitas) via=20= the French (gravit=E9) and, "the word was first introduced in figurative=20= senses corresponding generally to the English senses of the adjective.=20= The primary physical sense of the Latin word came into Eng. first in=20 the 17th century." Which comment is immediately followed by, "I. The quality of being Grave. 1. Weight, influence, authority...." Thus it is that we speak of a man or words of gravity, implying no=20 physical movement toward the center of the Earth or attraction between=20= physical masses but rather authority or, minimally, someone or=20 something that has to be taken seriously, some thing that weighs on the=20= mind if you will. Assuming that this first meaning of "gravity" is the one that Weil had=20= in mind, her contrast of Gravity and Grace simply adds a dash of=20 alliteration to a felt difference between heavy and uplifting emotions.=20= So what's the big mystery? Feeling pugnacious (in a light-hearted sort of way), John L. McCreery The Word Works, Ltd. 55-13-202 Miyagaya, Nishi-ku Yokohama, Japan 220-0006 Tel 81-45-314-9324 Email mccreery@xxxxxxx "Making Symbols is Our Business" ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html