Don't Even Think of Disagreeing with This

Sometimes you can argue a point and sometimes you can’t. Those times you can’t there are several words that might be helpful to know: asseveration, irrefragable, ineluctable, and apodictic.

An asseveration is similar in form and in meaning to assertion. It comes from the Latin word severus, from which we get the word severe (go figure). It means strict and severe. The Latin added the prefix ad- which means “to” and developed the word asseverare, which means “to swear solemnly, act with earnestness, or assert strongly. Its entry into English in the 1550s came with an exaggerated meaning, and means a vehement assertion, or to state positively or seriously. The idea is that there is no room for disagreement. Which brings us to the word irrefragable.

If the word irrefragable sounds familiar, you’re undoubtedly remembering the word from July 11. Irrefragable comes from the Latin root word fragari, which refers to a contest or opposition. The re- in Latin is the same as the ir- in English; it is a negating prefix. As the word came to English from Late Latin (by which time it was irrefragabilis) in the 1530s it was used to refer to that which cannot be refutable. In that respect it is a synonym for irrefutable; the difference is that irrefutable deals with an inability to be able to reason differently. Irrefragable refers to the inability to oppose in any manner – including, one supposes, physically (as in the contest from which its meaning derives). By the way, in my dictionary it is the word above irrefrangible, which is the word above irrefutable, making it easy to compare the three.

Unlike irrefutable and irrefrangible, there is no word refragable.

In the same way there is no word electable, only ineluctable. The Latin root word is similar to fragari in its meaning: it is luctari, which means to struggle. Add an ex-, which means out, lose the x and you have eluctari. Add another prefix, in-, meaning “not” and you get a Latin word ineluctari that means that which cannot be resisted by struggling. Its English counterpart (which arrived in 1623) means certain, inevitable, unavoidable or inescapable. No sense even trying. There is a sense of struggling against it that remains, which is why it’s a good word to use when you wish you could get out of something but know there’s no use trying.

Our final word today is apodictic. An asseveration that can be shown or proven but doesn’t need to be is apodictic. Apodictic is an adjective describing that which is absolutely certain or necessarily true. It is a Greek word, the apo- meaning ”from”, and deiknynai meaning “to show”. Provability is a component in the meaning. It entered English in the 1650s and has the presumption of clearly demonstrated. If you have an opinion or contention that is so obvious as to thwart any opposing view, it is apodictic.

I’m sure you agree; it’s apodictic.

Anniversary part 1

There were those who thought it would be fugacious and frangible, but it has turned out to be irrefragably puissant. It is not a litote to say that its multifarious efflorescence has been supernal rather than specious. We did not abjure and as a result have accreted recondite benisons.

I’m writing, of course, about that which Dovie and I celebrate today: 29 years of marriage. There is much which can and should be said about the spending of half my life (so far; the percentage will now begin to exceed that mark) with my sweetheart, and much which need not be revisited. But as we look at the above paragraph it will have to suffice for this year’s description. (And it will take two blogs. It would fill a book to adequately describe these 29 years.)

It was on our wedding day that a quondam girlfriend of mine approached me to say that she couldn’t live with herself if she didn’t tell me her concern that we were being rash and that the marriage wouldn’t last. (Quondam means former or at one time, and came in the 1530s directly from the Latin word quondam that means formerly.) She didn’t use the words fugacious or frangible, but that’s what she meant.

Fugacious came to English in the 1630s from the Latin word fugax, from which we also get fugitive. Fugax means to flee. Fugacious means fleeting or passing away quickly, ephemeral.

Frangible arrived in English in the mid-15th century from the Middle French word frangible, which came from the Middle Latin word frangibilis, which developed from the Latin word frangere, which means “to break”. It means breakable or fragile. So how is it different from fragile (and which is the “good word” for this meaning)? My dictionary has one of those wonderful usage paragraphs after fragile that explains the difference:

Fragile implies such delicacy of structure as to be easily broken…; frangible adds to this the connotation of liability to being broken because of the use to which the thing is put…; brittle implies such inelasticity as to be easily broken or shattered by pressure or a blow…; crisp suggests a desirable sort of brittleness…; friable is applied to something that is easily crumbled or crushed into powder.

Back to our marriage. It has been irrefragably puissant. The -frag- in irrefragable comes from the same Latin word, fragere, as frangible; the actual Late Latin word is irrefragabilis. So we know that frag means break. The ir- means “not” and the refragabilis means to oppose or contest. So irrefragable, when it came to English in the 1530s, meant cannot be contested or refuted. It still does.

Puissant (pronounced pyoo-is-ent or pwis-nt) means powerful or strong, and comes to English from Middle French (again in the mid-15th century). The Middle French word puissant came from an earlier form, poissant, which was derived from the stem word for “being able”, poeir. It’s the word from which we get the word power. Our marriage has had surprising puissance.