illaudable and illeism and illify and illth and illth of nations

The OLD has two seemingly similar words: illaboratus, which refers primarily to the soil and means "unworked upon, untilled," and illaboro, the verb, which means "to work at." However, the only attested uses in English are of illaborate, meaning "unlabored" or "unfinished" or "carelessly done" and illaborious, which means "lazy." I think the word illaborate has great possibilities in English because of its aural association with elaborate. Something that is elaborate, as we all know, is intricate or well-developed. Illaborate suggests the opposite. "Once again, his illaborate plans came crashing down." I like John Donne's quotation using illaborious. "This in-industrious and illaborious man who takes no paines.." Thus, if you really want subtly to insult people, commend them for their illaborate (carelessly done) efforts. They will think they are being praised, but you will know better than that...

On Ills

A few words that have no Latin roots but are derived from the English "Ill" are illth, illfare and illify. The word illth, meaning "ill-being" was invented by John Ruskin in 1860: "As mere accidental stays and impediments acting not as wealth, but (for we ought to have a corresponding term) as 'illth.' On the 40th anniversary of the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, former World Bank economist Herman Daly spoke on "Uneconomic Growth and the Illth of Nations." His point was that classical economists were interested in allocation of resources and distribution of wealth, but they avoided the issue of sustainability of scale. "The notion of scale isn't even on their radar." Because the ecosystem cannot expand infinitely, Daly and the "sustainable growth" people [who have emerged in the 1990s as a 2nd generation group of environmentalists who believe that the growth is good, but it has to be within certain limits] argue for elimination of activities that do not sustain the environment. I think the word "illth" can be loosed from its economic context and used in a variety of ways. "Instead of promoting the well-being of his players, the coach pursued their illth." "Parents must be alert to the ways that school programs and well-meaning adults might promote their children's illth." Has possiblities, don't you think?

Then, there is illfare, the condition of getting on badly, infelicity or adversity. In the last few years it has been used as a sort of nonsense word--conservatives deride the liberals for their invention of the "illfare state," but the word actually goes back to the Middle Ages, "This was to their unhapp and ylfare." Or, from 1640: "It much conduces to the dishonor of a King, and the illfare of his Kingdome, to multiply Nobilitie." I like the phrase "to conduce to one's illfare.." When so much of life consists of ironies, or unintended results when good plans are laid, I think that the word has a future.

Then there is illify, which is not in the OED but the Century has it as "to speak ill of; reproach or defame." It is almost identical in meaning to vilify, and we might not need a new word, but sometimes it is arresting or helpful to vary your speech. Or, when people hear you say "illify" they might think you have a speech impairment.

Illeism

I have to introduce this word because I ran into it last year when studying secondary literature on Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, a play which gives us the clearest example of what the word means. Illeism is the habit of speaking of oneself in the third person. The Latin "ille" means "that one," and one who speaks in this way is really an egotist. But, maybe not. When I was taught how to write papers, beginning way back in the third or fourth grade, I was always taught never to use the word "I." Why? I don't know, but perhaps it was a means of training little people to avoid the apparent subjectivity of the "I" by couching a statement in the seemingly more objective "he" or "they" or "we." But, as we see in Julius Caesar, Ceasar's use of his name in the third person can be an example of insufferable pride. So we have the quotation from Coleridge: "For one piece of egotism..there are fifty that steal out in the mask of tuisms and ille-isms." Or, as Blackwell's Magazine has it in 1832: "Your intense egotist avoids the use of the first person pronoun. He is, in fact, an Ille-ist." In our own day people who speak this way are more likely to use the first person plural. "We have decided," when in fact only one person has probably made the decision. Is this an example of "illeism"? I think so. We are trying to deflect potential criticism by distributing responsibilty to unnamed others.

Closing with Illaudable

Be sure not to confuse this word with inaudible. Things would really be confusing if there was a word illaudible--meaning something that couldn't be heard, but I guess there isn't. But something that is illaudable is not worthy of praise. Milton could pile up the double negatives in the following sentence: "His actions are diversly reported, by Huntingdon not thought illaudable." Actually the word illaudable is used in good literature, where O. Henry speaks of a profligate and illaudable action, or Jane Austen can speak of a "restraint of sentiments that were not themselves illaudable." I prefer to use the word with a litotes: "a not illaudable action" or "motivations that were not per se illaudable."

I hope this is a good start.

[Next]

1111