Reply
Thu 30 Jun, 2011 01:06 am
made light of the Galloping Hessian as an arrant jockey = despised the Galloping Hessian as an notorious rider?
Context:
The tale was told of old Brouwer, a most heretical disbeliever in ghosts, how he met the horseman returning from his foray into Sleepy Hollow, and was obliged to get up behind him; how they galloped over hill and swamp until they reached the church bridge. There the horseman suddenly turned into a skeleton, threw old Brouwer into the brook, and sprang away over the treetops with a clap of thunder. This story was matched by Brom Bones, who made light of the Galloping Hessian as an arrant jockey. He affirmed that, on returning one night from a neighboring village, he had been overtaken by this midnight trooper; that he had offered to race with him for a bowl of punch, and should have won it, too; but just as they came to the church bridge, the Hessian bolted, and vanished in a flash of fire. The revel now gradually broke up. The old farmers gathered together their families in their wagons, and were heard for some time rattling along over the distant hills. Some of the damsels mounted behind their favorite swains, and their lighthearted laughter, mingling with the clatter of hoofs, echoed along the silent woodlands.
First we need to deal with Washington Irving's quixotic spelling. "Arrant" i suppose could be considered a variant of errant, although i would say it's simply an incorrect spelling born of ignorance. Errant (or in this case, "arrant") means wandering, straying, being mistaken, or even willfully being wrong. It comes from the French verb errer, which means to wander or stray. It is the origin of the word error.
So, no, it doesn't mean to portray him as a notorious rider. It is, in fact, a double-entendre. The term "a knight errant" has become so common in English as to be a cliché, meaning a wandering knight, and Irving is using "arrant" to mean both that the headless horseman wanders about the countryside, as well as that there is something wrong (sinister, evil) about the headless horseman.
So Brom Bones "makes light of" (does not take seriously) the stories of the headless horseman, and Irving is making light of the headless horseman himself, ironically desccribing him as an errant ("arrant") jockey.
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:First we need to deal with Washington Irving's quixotic spelling. "Arrant" i suppose could be considered a variant of errant, although i would say it's simply an incorrect spelling born of ignorance.
Arrant is actually a word, Setanta, common in slightly old-fashioned British and American English. It means utter, completely such, thoroughgoing, out-and-out, complete, etc. An arrant fool. Such arrant luxury. Whatever its alleged origin, in modern English "arrant" has a completely different meaning from "errant".
The word "jockey" has a variant meaning apart from its usual one of "rider in a horse race". It can mean "trickster" or "cheat" so that to make light of someone as an arrant jockey would have meant to dismiss them as an utter cheat or trickster, an interpretation borne out by the context.
@contrex,
I don't see any distinction to be made between the meaning of errant and "arrant" in 19th century English.
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
I don't see any distinction to be made between the meaning of errant and "arrant" in 19th century English.
Why not? The words grew apart in meaning much earlier. Arrant with the meaning I gave shows up plenty of times in Shakespeare for example. Robert Baker complained in 1770 that the two words were too often confused.
In the absence of any evidence provided by you, we may as well assume you are arguing for the sake of it, and because you cannot handle being contradicted, so fragile is your personality.
@contrex,
What a silly gobshit you are. I consider the two to be largely interchangeable because, in youir terms, i would use and have frequently seen errant used to mean "utter, completely such, thoroughgoing, out-and-out, complete." If i were so sensitive of contradiction as you, in your typical nasty attitude, allege, i'd have objected to the contruction you put on jockey. I didn't, because i don't see any reason to disagree. I do see good reason to disagree with a claim that errant and arrant cannot be used interchangeably,
pacem Mr. Baker.
What a nasty little **** you are.
Widespread error doth not usage make. Setanta makes it even clearer that he is, as the Brits put it, a "wanker".
@contrex,
I'll bet you're an expert on wanking.
From the Merriam-Webster entry on errant:
Origin of ERRANT
Middle English erraunt, from Anglo-French errant, present participle of
errer to err &
errer to travel, from Late Latin
iterare, from Latin
iter road, journey — more at itinerant
First Known Use: 14th century
It is immmaterial to me what you allege to be widespread error. What's truly hilarious is for anyone to quibble about orthography in English at any time before the 19th century, whether it be the Arch-Wanker Contrex or his precious Mr. Baker.
May I disregard some of the foregoing and opine that arrant and errant are different words with quite distinct meanings, in my experience.
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote: "Arrant" i suppose could be considered a variant of errant, although i would say it's simply an incorrect spelling born of ignorance.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arrant
origin of arrant
alteration of errant
first known use: 14th century
@ehBeth,
My big dictionary (now that I've consulted it) confirms this.
The adjectives errant and arrant have been mixed up for centuries, but modern usage prefers to keep them apart. By modern I mean after about 1700.
@ehBeth,
Quote:Setanta wrote:
"Arrant" i suppose could be considered a variant of errant, although i would say it's simply an incorrect spelling born of ignorance.
ehBeth added:
That entry doesn't describe 'arrant' as a variant of 'errant', Beth. It tells where 'arrant' [might have/probably] comes from.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace