ATEG Archives

March 1997

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Norman Carlson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 17 Mar 1997 17:07:49 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
I don't necessarily want to change the subject, only to
comment--prompted by Johanna's reference to the "inevitable changes in
the language"--about an apparent change in the language that I would be
interested in hearing comment on.
 
In the past few days, once in a poem and again in a novel, both works by
reasonably highly regarded writers--I have come across the word "hung"
to refer to people who had committed suicide by stringing themselves up:
e.g., "One poor client hung himself from a basement rafter--...."  I
recall being taught that beef (and other animal) carcasses were "hung"
for aging purposes, but that human beings were "hanged."  Is this now a
laughably quaint distinction?
 
Norm Carlson
Western Michigan University

ATOM RSS1 RSS2