View Single Post
Old 10-12-2021, 11:55 AM   #37
Catlady
Grand Sorcerer
Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Catlady ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Catlady's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,421
Karma: 52734361
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: Kindle Fire, Kindle Paperwhite, AGPTek Bluetooth Clip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Robin View Post
I wouldn't have either, but were I trying to write for the period it would still have been easy to check before using them. The OED online has detailed etymologies including earliest recorded (or least extant) use, so a careful author doing proper research could test whether they fit. Whereas slang of the period may well have vanished without a written trace, allowing modern authors to make it up with less fear of being caught out.
But why in the world would an author/editor/proofreader even THINK of checking everyday words like manipulate, flawlessly, or selfless? It's not like a writer is attempting to forge an Austen manuscript that must pass muster, and is worried about being tripped up by a wily detective who just happens to be an etymologist.

What else would possibly trigger anyone else to look up every darn word? Certainly the concepts existed. It's not the same as checking to see if something or other had been invented or in use by a certain date.
Catlady is offline   Reply With Quote