[lit-ideas] Re: Refudiate

  • From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:41:44 EDT

In a message dated 8/7/2010 7:08:59 P.M., mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx  writes:

On 8/2/2010 5:43 PM, Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx wrote:
>  Palin is impicating that there are no peaceful Muslims.

To me it  seems that Palin has merely heard the 
word "repudiate," never read the  word on a page, 
and mashes it together with "refuse."

Has that been  considered by linguists? Probably 
most of these aw-shucks, bumpkin-manqué,  hee-haw 
locutions arise from speakers who have not read 
the word in  question, merely heard it.
Don't think so. For she said:
"pls refudiate"
and then she corrected that to "reject" or "refute", rather than  'refuse'.
Finally she notes that Shakespeare, also for effect, emphatises a term so  
that it catches the eye or the ear.
Palin had used the word before, in an interview. "Refudiate the comments of 
 us as racists" she had claimed.

The word had been used back in  1920.
In general, it's best to see it as a portmanteau of 'repudiate' (which is  
VERY Strong, and Palin did not want anything as strong) with 'refute' (as in 
 'refute an argument') and 'refuse' (as in 'refuse funds to the proposed  
Apparenty, it's going to be introduced in the third edition of the Oxford  
English Dictionary.

Other related posts: