Words from Advise and Consent

I just finished reading Advise and Consent, a great book. But the one thing I found distracting was the consistent use of the word sardonic by the author Allen Drury. Another word that Drury used consistently that always disrupted the flow of my reading was his use of the word allot when allocate would have also worked. So it drove me to the dictionary. What’s the difference between allot and allocate, and sardonic and sarcastic, and what’s the good word to use in what situation?

Let’s begin with sardonic. Sardonic is an adjective that means cynical or mocking; it has a sense of derision or bitterness to it. It came to English in the 1630s from French, where it was spelled sardonique. The French got it from the Latin word sardonius, which came from the Greek word sardonius, which related to “bitter or scornful [laughter]” and was altered from Homer’s sardanios. In case that’s not enough etymology, sardanios was influenced by Sardonios, the Greek word for Sardinian, because they thought a “plant they called sardonion (literally “plant from Sardinia…”) caused facial convulsions resembling those of sardonic laughter, usually followed by death” according to etymonline.com. Think of the laughter of the villain's laughter when the train is coming down the track toward the heroine who is tied up and place across the railroad tracks.

Sarcastic, on the other hand, also has a meaning of derision and bitterness, with the flavoring of irony thrown in as well. If you take a sardonic comment and turn it around to say the opposite thing with derision, it’s sarcastic. While sarcasm (the noun form of sarcastic) arrived in English in the 1570s, the adjective sarcastic took about 120 years to develop. Sarcasm came from the Late Latin word sarcasmos, which came from the Greek word sarkazein. While sarkazein literally translated means “to strip off the flesh” (see excoriate), its meaning in Greek was to sneer or speak bitterly about.

The difference between allot and allocate is not simply shortening by taking the cae out of allocate. While dictionary.com’s definition of allocate is “to set apart for a particular purpose; assign or allot,” its definition of allot is (along with a second definition of “to set apart for a particular purpose”) to divide or distribute by share or portion (which brings to mind the synonym apportion). Apportion means to distribute or allocate proportionally. And the circle is complete. Allocate means to allot, allot means to allocate by portion, and apportion means to allocate proportionally. So we have three words that mean the same thing?

Maybe the etymology can provide some clarification. Allot came to English first, in the late 1400s, from the Old French word aloter, which meant to divide by or into lots. Within a century, in the 1570s, apportion arrived from the Middle French apportionner, which came from the Old French aporcioner (apparently the difference between Old and Middle French is double letters), which meant to divide into portions. The same as allot, it seems.

Allocate showed up in English in another 60 years, from the Medieval Latin allocate. Allocate was “the common first word in writs authorizing payment”, according to etymonline.com, and was formed by combining the two Latin words for “to” and “place”; so to place something in another’s possession is to allocate.

So what’s the difference? Very little. Use allocate when it comes to money, apportion when something is divided up according to some formula. And use allot in a formal assignment to another if it does not have a sense of any portioning or is not a monetary transaction. It’s not much difference, and you likely won’t be excoriated if you use one word when another might be more accurate, but at least now you know.