|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 12:34:45 GMT
I thought I'd start a new thread on this.
Most British English people under 30 are now quite happy to use blatant in sentences like He blatantly fancies her or She says they didn't but they blatantly did. It means something like "definitely".
I'd (and I'm 55) use it in He was a blatant liar or Women fell for his blatant charms, where its meaning is close to "shameless", although there are nuances of "obvious", too. But it's a pejorative word.
It's an interesting change, because I see it as being brought about by people hearing an unfamiliar word and guessing its meaning. Just as judges used to condemn a criminal for "the enormity of your crime" -- the judge meant wickedness, the listeners heard magnitude -- so I'd say "He was blatantly lying" and I'd mean shamelessly and obviously, but people would hear definitely.
I first remember hearing it in the new sense in 2006. Dr Mildr says her son has been using the new sense for maybe five years, so maybe I missed it for a while.
I rather like it.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on Jun 27, 2008 13:52:43 GMT
Paul, There are overtones of flagrant I detect in your usage. Essentially, it means something like "completely obvious". See Dictionary.com.
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Jun 27, 2008 13:56:02 GMT
Perhaps this new use of blatantly is the application of a mis-heard patently? (If I hear patently obvious my tautology alarm goes off!)
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 15:30:35 GMT
Essentially, it means something like "completely obvious". See Dictionary.com. Does it, though? That's the modern meaning -- there's nothing perjorative to it at all: when my daughter says of her friend "she blatantly fancied him" there's no criticism intended, and she doesn't even mean that the girl made it obvious. Pretty much all the dictionary.com meanings give some nuance of "offensive", though. Dictionary.com also says " Blatant is sometimes used to mean simply "obvious," as in the blatant danger of such an approach, but this use has not been established and is widely considered an error." I think I might have said blatant danger; this new usage takes it further though, and I don't think one could now say it "is widely considered an error". The links with flagrant and patent are interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on Jun 27, 2008 20:24:43 GMT
If there is a move towards "blatant" meaning "obvious" then perhaps it's a malopropism for "patent"?
However, I say "if", because I thought it had long had the meaning "obvious". My OED does not mention that meaning at all (staying with the calumnical side of things), but my 1994 compact Collins had as the first meaning "glaringly obvious" and as the second "offensively noticeable.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jun 27, 2008 20:30:41 GMT
> (If I hear patently obvious my tautology alarm goes off!)<To my everlasting shame (well, 15 seconds, at least : I discovered only today that there is a totally different, and somewhat contradictory, meaning to "tautology", viz: (SOED) Philos. The absolute identification of cause and effect; an expression of this. rare. M17. Logic. A compound proposition which is unconditionally true for all the truth-possibilities of its component propositions and by virtue of its logical form. E20. b A proposition that is true by virtue of the meaning of its terms. M20.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 20:37:58 GMT
Is that a malapropism for malapropism?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 20:41:36 GMT
.. (staying with the calumnical side of things), but my 1994 compact Collins had as the first meaning "glaringly obvious" and as the second "offensively noticeable. I'd say both of those have pejorative overtones. To be glaring and/or offensive is not good. Also, the modern meaning is not quite that of obvious. Someone just said to me "she blatantly doesn't trust me" and (knowing the situation) the meaning is that of definitely, not obviously.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Jun 27, 2008 20:44:49 GMT
> (If I hear patently obvious my tautology alarm goes off!)<To my everlasting shame (well, 15 seconds, at least : I discovered only today that there is a totally different, and somewhat contradictory, meaning to "tautology", viz: (SOED) Philos. The absolute identification of cause and effect; an expression of this. rare. M17. Logic. A compound proposition which is unconditionally true for all the truth-possibilities of its component propositions and by virtue of its logical form. E20. b A proposition that is true by virtue of the meaning of its terms. M20. I didn't understand any of those definitions, Tone, so I'll stick contentedly to the one I know.
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jun 27, 2008 20:49:23 GMT
I thought I'd start a new thread on this. Most British English people under 30 are now quite happy to use blatant in sentences like He blatantly fancies her or She says they didn't but they blatantly did. It means something like "definitely". I'd (and I'm 55) use it in He was a blatant liar or Women fell for his blatant charms, where its meaning is close to "shameless", although there are nuances of "obvious", too. But it's a pejorative word. It's an interesting change, because I see it as being brought about by people hearing an unfamiliar word and guessing its meaning. Just as judges used to condemn a criminal for "the enormity of your crime" -- the judge meant wickedness, the listeners heard magnitude -- so I'd say "He was blatantly lying" and I'd mean shamelessly and obviously, but people would hear definitely. I first remember hearing it in the new sense in 2006. Dr Mildr says her son has been using the new sense for maybe five years, so maybe I missed it for a while. I rather like it. I'm 27, Paul, and I've been using "blatantly" for about 10 years. I'm unsure of whether this is from blatant, or patently. I honestly couldn't tell you. It's a very interesting debate though.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 20:58:17 GMT
Vadim, a tame 27-year-old, excellent!
Do you detect older people using blatant in a different way?
If someone my age used it your way, would you regard it as one of those words (like dude, say) that older people really shouldn't try to use?!
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jun 27, 2008 21:05:51 GMT
Vadim, a tame 27-year-old, excellent! Do you detect older people using blatant in a different way? If someone my age used it your way, would you regard it as one of those words (like dude, say) that older people really shouldn't try to use?! If ANYONE used dude, I would run a mile, after cringing and throwing up. Honestly, nobody I know uses this, except those in need of a white coat, and not the scientific kind! As for blatantly, hmm, I think it would come down to age brackets. I'd probably except it from ages up to 45 say (no strict line blatantly) however, anyone over that, or in an "elderly" position (grandparents etc. ) I would do a double-take. I wouldn't pull it up though.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 21:14:42 GMT
I'd probably except it from ages up to 45 say Thanks for that. There's an interesting study to be done on age-specific language. (It's accept, by the way, not except. Sorry!)
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jun 27, 2008 21:17:05 GMT
I'd probably except it from ages up to 45 say Thanks for that. There's an interesting study to be done on age-specific language. (It's accept, by the way, not except. Sorry!) That's blatantly what I meant! Thanks, Paul. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 27, 2008 21:21:09 GMT
See, blatantly is great!
|
|