h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Yep, you can't wreak peace on anyone

You can wreak peace, it's just that you have to wreak it on someone who doesn't like peace or it's a bit pointless. You could wreak peace on the Krikkits

So y'got no notion what goes with notions ..?

Sounds like Myc has a definition and etymology for 'wreak'. I hope he shares it. Olde English I bet. Wierd that it 'sounds/feels/looks' like wreck and reek since both of them have negative connotations. There must be a connection. Please tell us Myc.

wreak
~jwf~ wreaking peace where-ever he goes

And whatsa Krikkit?

wreak - from Middle English wreken, from Old English wrecan, meaning to take vengeance.

Don't know what a krikkit is though.

176645

The only references to 'notions and' something or similar I can think of/find in that context are sewing notions, notions & small wares, notions & white goods, and notions & fancy goods. Any of these ring a bell?

Wreak's meanings are all associated with inflicting or visiting retribution, either verbally, spiritually or physically. As you say it comes from OE and shares the same root as wreck (as well as wretch, urge and even garcon), but reek is unconnected and originally meant smoke (e.g. Edinburgh was called Auld Reekie because of the chimney smoke).

The Krikkits are a race created by DNA who wanted to kill all other life forms. Technically the were in favour of peace too, but only after they'd killed everyone else .

Just as a footnote, reek came to be used to denote a stench as well as a smoke around 1700. I'm just guessing but I think the change might have something to do with the increasing use of coal fires as wood smoke doesn't stink nearly as much.

Maybe it's my Canadian cultural upbringing but I now feel genuinely obliged to thank you and publically acknowledge your succint and yet comprehensive answer. You are, as I said rather cynically at our first encounter, so very often, so fully informed and completely correct. And deservedly proud of it, I'm sure.
But until the self deprecating comments you made elsewhere (which I noted - wherever it was) you gave me the impression of a being a pedant and a boer. I apologise for thinking that now, but I do remind you that the one incident of a sense of humour (just noted above) was your only salvation from my contempt . Now that you have shown yourself to be human I will respect you as such. People with no sense of humour [long list deleted for sake of bandwidth] are just in my way.
peace
~jwf~

*riddled with self doubt and second guessing about the above posting I now hasten to add with a *

Can you pinpoint Krikkits in the works?


~jwf~

Of course - how could I have forgotten the Krikkits. Shame on me!

Life the Universe and Everything.

176645

Anyone like to debate the past tense of "wreak"? I think it may be "wrought"

Not read the backlog, for I am now a lazy PhD and indeed will be spending today in the BOF Inn http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F57147?thread=86772&latest=1 celebrating. Care to join me?

Does "wrought" not come from "worked"? You would speak of jewellery being finely wrought for example. "Wreaked" sounds clumsy, but I think it's correct.

Firstly, muchos respect to Dr M!

As for 'wrought', my dictionary says: "Wrought is sometimes used as if it were the past tense and past participle of wreak,... Many people think this use is incorrect." Which is not to say it really is incorrect, just that people think it is. Who gets to decide?

We all get to decide. Language is organic, so as long as you're making sense to the person you're speaking to, that's fine. If however the people in the next town don't understand you or accept your usage, the collective has to arrive at a consensus. And so the gap between dictionary English and spoken English is maintained. It's like theory and practice.

Still surprised by "wrought" though.

That sounds like a remarkably honest dictionary, although when it says "many people think this use is incorrect" what it probably means is that two of the five lexicographers who worked on it say it's incorrect. Dictionary definitions - unsurprisingly - get decided by people who write the dictionaries, but the problem is that they often don't know nearly as much as they'd like people to think.

'Wrought' is definitely the past participle of 'work', and there doesn't seem to be much evidence that it's also the past participle of 'wreak'. However, this doesn't mean that the phrase 'wrought havoc' is wrong: 'work' is one of those words that have dozens of meanings, several of which are virtually synonymous with 'wreak', and 'to work havoc (on)' has been around for centuries. Consequently, there's nothing ungrammatical about using 'wrought' as if it were 'wreaked', but it might be ungrammatical to say they're one and the same.

Thanks, jwf, but I fear you're mistaken: I'm rarely fully informed or completely correct - I just make stuff up and no-one seems to notice. I do indeed have a sense of humour (your posts always make me laugh, anyway ) but that doesn't necessarily make me human, and it doesn't stop me from being a pedant or bore either

Hmmm... gracious and wearing an asbestos suit too I see. Nice to meet you.
peace
~jwf~

Well, if I get a say, how about 'wroke' (cf. speak/spoke)?

If it ain't wroke don't fix it...