Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mcvax!lambert
From: lambert@mcvax.uucp (Lambert Meertens)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: "Presently" ?= "Now"
Message-ID: <7112@boring.mcvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-Oct-86 06:13:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: boring.7112
Posted: Sat Oct 18 06:13:56 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Oct-86 23:24:50 EDT
References: <3489@utcsri.UUCP> <7234@utzoo.UUCP>
Reply-To: lambert@boring.uucp (Lambert Meertens)
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 31
Apparently-To: rnews@mcvax


In article <7234@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:

> The use of "presently" to mean "now" is a corruption arising from
> ignorance; its proper meaning, as of some years ago, was "soon".

But then, of course, the use of "presently" to mean "in a short while,
soon" once was a corruption arising from sloppiness; its proper
meaning, as of some centuries ago, was precisely what you would expect
the adverb of "present" to mean.  This first corruption got so common
that the original meaning survived only in certain pockets (dialects)
of English, both in the U.K. and in America.

The meaning of words in natural languages tend to shift, and this is a
good thing in general, because it helps to keep languages tuned to ease
of use in a shifting context.  Not all changes are beneficial; in
particular, the first shift in meaning of "presently" did not meet an
expressive need, but affected the orthogonal method of forming adverbs
by appending "-ly".

An interesting question, but hard to resolve without extensive
research, and even then probably unanswerable, is to what extent the
recent advance of the "now" meaning is an independent development, and
to what extent it is due to a new gaining ground, in *uninterrupted*
survival, of the old meaning.  There *are* some attested cases of
seemingly obsolete words, or obliterated meanings of words, that
refused to die out and succeeded eventually in totally turning the
tide.

-- 

Lambert Meertens, CWI, Amsterdam; lambert@mcvax.UUCP