Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsri.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!hogg
From: hogg@utcsri.UUCP (John Hogg)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: "Presently" ?= "Now"
Message-ID: <3494@utcsri.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 17-Oct-86 12:17:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsri.3494
Posted: Fri Oct 17 12:17:03 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Oct-86 12:17:52 EDT
References: <3489@utcsri.UUCP> <7234@utzoo.UUCP>
Reply-To: hogg@utcsri.UUCP (John Hogg)
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 29
Summary: Check the OED!

>The use of "presently" to mean "now" is a corruption arising from
>ignorance; its proper meaning, as of some years ago, was "soon".
>However, said corruption is so common now that it is effectively
>part of the language, and most dictionaries are in the business of
>describing the language as it is, not as somebody thinks it should
>have been.

It's amazing that the English language hasn't toppled over long ago,
considering how far back some of the rot started.  Take the current
teapot tempest: "presently" meaning "now", from the viewpoint of the early
part of this century, was obsolete in literary English, but common in
dialects.  The first use given in the Oxford English Dictionary is dated
1485.  The meaning "at once" was first recorded in 1430 and the current
"correct" meaning of "soon" was a late starter in 1566.  Similar stories
can be told about other non-words that posters fume about: the scandalous
"functionality" appeared over a century ago.

There otta bea law: no poster should be allowed to fulminate about any
word until she or he has looked it up in the OED.  This would of course
severely restrict postings, but information content might go up.  Warning:
check the Supplements too.  For instance, the sense of the verb "impact"
that is currently in vogue has only been recorded since 1916.  In most
scenarios its use still impacts me adversely, but it is considered a valid
word.
-- 

John Hogg
hogg@utcsri.uucp
hogg@csri.toronto.cdn