Here, let's see what you JavaScript programmers have got

[HVS]

On 04 Sep 2008, Dan McGrath wrote

Since when does "rare" have anything to do with "pleasant"? It
doesn't. It only means "uncommon".

Utter bollocks. (But not rare, unfortunately.)

"A rare wine" implies a good wine and a pleasant one -- not just an
uncommon one.

In fact, for me the word "rare" can probably connote
*UN*pleasantness.

Well, goody for you; that has absolutely no bearing on its other
meanings.

- Dan, who generally analyzes English as a non-native speaker
would

You're flattering yourself, Daniel: non-native speakers also
generally analyse what they've been told.

And you have also done this, in the past.

I'm convinced you can do it again; and I think you're now simply
choosing not to do so, or given up trying to.

 

[Michael Wojcik]

Since when does "rare" have anything to do with "pleasant"?

Since at least 1596, according to the OED.

It doesn't.

Usually a vapid claim, for any pair of word and meaning. Can you show
that there is no significant group of English speakers for whom "rare"
sometimes takes the connotation "pleasant"? If not, on what grounds
can you claim that "rare" never has that association? What would it
even mean to state that a given word does not have a given connotation?

It only means "uncommon".

So "rare meat" is uncommon meat? "Rare atmosphere" is uncommon
atmosphere? A "rare earth" is an uncommon earth?

In fact, for me the word "rare" can probably connote *UN*pleasantness.

I believe you've just provided a counterargument to your previous
sentence.

Enough.

 

[Mike Duffy]

"Rare atmosphere" is uncommon atmosphere?

The molecules are comparatively rare (uncommon) per unit volume.

A "rare earth" is an uncommon earth?

The full expression is: "Rare earth metal". These metals are uncommon.

Enough.

Agreed. And you forgot "rarebit".

 

[Chuck Riggs]

Since at least 1596, according to the OED.


Usually a vapid claim, for any pair of word and meaning. Can you show
that there is no significant group of English speakers for whom "rare"
sometimes takes the connotation "pleasant"? If not, on what grounds
can you claim that "rare" never has that association? What would it
even mean to state that a given word does not have a given connotation?

My parents, both born in 1924, one on the West Coast and one on the
East Coast, often applied "rare" in a complimentary way to mean
someone was exceptionally funny or intelligent, which I think they
more or less equated.
--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[Chuck Riggs]

The molecules are comparatively rare (uncommon) per unit volume.




The full expression is: "Rare earth metal". These metals are uncommon.




Agreed. And you forgot "rarebit".

As in "Welsh rarebit", where the "rarebit" is a misunderstanding (What
is the fancier term?) for "rabbit".
--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[Barbara Bailey]

My parents, both born in 1924, one on the West Coast and one on the
East Coast, often applied "rare" in a complimentary way to mean
someone was exceptionally funny or intelligent, which I think they
more or less equated.

At least since 1848.

"‘T is heaven alone that is given away,
‘T is only God may be had for the asking;
There is no price set on the lavish summer,
And June may be had by the poorest comer.

"And what is so rare as a day in June?
Then, if ever, come perfect days;
...."

certainly doesn't mean that June has only a few days, or that they are
less common than in other months. It means that June days are especially
fine -- as near to perfect as days ever are..

 

[Dan McGrath]

My parents, both born in 1924, one on the West Coast and one on the
East Coast, often applied "rare" in a complimentary way to mean
someone was exceptionally funny or intelligent,

Then they were mis-using the word, I guess.

which I think they

more or less equated.

They equated what?

- Dan

 

[HVS]

On 05 Sep 2008, Dan McGrath wrote

Then they were mis-using the word, I guess.

You guess wrong.

The meaning of words are what they are, and insisting on restricting
them to what you would prefer them to be is utterly pointless.

[shrug] But you already know this.

 

[John Varela]

My parents, both born in 1924, one on the West Coast and one on the
East Coast, often applied "rare" in a complimentary way to mean
someone was exceptionally funny or intelligent, which I think they
more or less equated.

I've heard that, though not lately. "That's rare!" is an exclamation
meaning that something is both pleasant and unexpected. It could be a
joke on TV or it could be an outstanding play on a sports field.

 

[Chuck Riggs]

Then they were mis-using the word, I guess.

which I think they

They equated what?

A good sense of humour and intelligence.

--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[Chuck Riggs]

I've heard that, though not lately. "That's rare!" is an exclamation
meaning that something is both pleasant and unexpected. It could be a
joke on TV or it could be an outstanding play on a sports field.

I haven't heard it for a long time, John. I wonder how many people
would understand that usage of rare, today.
--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[CDB]

I've heard that, though not lately. "That's rare!" is an
exclamation meaning that something is both pleasant and unexpected.
It could be a joke on TV or it could be an outstanding play on a
sports field.

"So Rare". They have Jimmy Dorsey too, but I like the Mills Brothers.

 

[John Holmes]

"So Rare". They have Jimmy Dorsey too, but I like the Mills Brothers.

I like the Mills Brothers too, but they were much better without a band
behind them. Here's some rare old footage:

 

[CDB]

CDB wrote:

[old and rare]

I like the Mills Brothers too, but they were much better without a
band behind them. Here's some rare old footage:

Thank you. You can really hear what good singers they were. That
must be an early performance: they were looking remarkably harmless
(restrained smiles, raised eyebrows, restrained body movements away
from the camera or sideways, little prolonged 'eye-contact' with the
viewer; the women had a little more freedom).

 

[John W Kennedy]

As in "Welsh rarebit", where the "rarebit" is a misunderstanding (What
is the fancier term?) for "rabbit".

"Genteelism".

 

[Chuck Riggs]

"Genteelism".

Thank you. It is that, but I was trying to think of the English usage
term for assuming a derivation that isn't so. If one correctly refers
to the dish as Welsh rabbit and he is incorrectly hypercorrected, I
think there is a term for that exchange.
--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[John W Kennedy]

Thank you. It is that, but I was trying to think of the English usage
term for assuming a derivation that isn't so. If one correctly refers
to the dish as Welsh rabbit and he is incorrectly hypercorrected, I
think there is a term for that exchange.

"Folk etymology"?

--
John W. Kennedy
"There are those who argue that everything breaks even in this old
dump of a world of ours. I suppose these ginks who argue that way hold
that because the rich man gets ice in the summer and the poor man gets
it in the winter things are breaking even for both. Maybe so, but I'll
swear I can't see it that way."
-- The last words of Bat Masterson

 

[R H Draney]

I like the Mills Brothers too, but they were much better without a band
behind them. Here's some rare old footage:

And here I thought you were going to post this:

.....r

 

[Chuck Riggs]

"Folk etymology"?

Thank you for the suggestion, but that is not the term I've been
trying to remember. It arose in one of the food threads, where the
Welsh Rabbit/Rarebit misunderstanding by either a waiter or a patron
was discussed at some length. I may be thinking of a hypercorrection.
--

Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

 

[John Holmes]

CDB wrote:

[old and rare]

I like the Mills Brothers too, but they were much better without a
band behind them. Here's some rare old footage:

Thank you. You can really hear what good singers they were. That
must be an early performance: they were looking remarkably harmless
(restrained smiles, raised eyebrows, restrained body movements away
from the camera or sideways, little prolonged 'eye-contact' with the
viewer; the women had a little more freedom).

A case of rare = wonderful as well as rare = seldom seen, I think. It
would be interesting to know just when it was recorded. Technically, it
looks earlier than their reported first film in 1932 (The Big
Broadcast*, according to Wikipedia). Musical performers were probably
still a bit shy of cameras in those days.

BTW, I'm sure I've seen those girls in a Roxy Music video clip more
recently.

*To compare the technical quality, here's an early Michael Jackson
impersonator from the same film. (And he leaves little doubt what the
song is about -- I recall 'cokey' being discussed here before.)