Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ptsfa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amd!dual!ptsfa!rob
From: rob@ptsfa.UUCP (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Semantic Reversals
Message-ID: <486@ptsfa.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Feb-85 22:51:25 EST
Article-I.D.: ptsfa.486
Posted: Wed Feb 20 22:51:25 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Feb-85 11:44:58 EST
References: <> <258@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: rob@ptsfa.UUCP (Rob Bernardo)
Organization: Pacific Bell, San Francisco
Lines: 28
Summary: 

One curious semantic reversal occurs in the expression:

	The exception proves the rule.

Originally 'prove' used to mean 'test' (cf. 'probe', a related word).
But as the meaning of this word changed, the expression changed also.
Until I heard of this explanation I [mis]understood this expression
to mean:

	Don't worry about the rule at hand having an exception
	since all rules have exceptions, here's the one exception that
	qualifies this rule as a true rule.


-- 


Rob Bernardo, Pacific Bell, San Francisco, California
{ihnp4,ucbvax,cbosgd,decwrl,amd70,fortune,zehntel}!dual!ptsfa!rob

	    	       _^__
	     	     ~/ \_.\
        _           ~/    \_\
      ~/ \_________~/   
     ~/  /\       /\ 
       _/  \     /  \
     _/      \ _/    \ 
              \      /