Phrases/words that set your teeth on edge.

[LMcD]

What is the difference between treacherous and traitorous?

Presumably traitorous refers to a traitor and treacherous to the actions of said traitor.

[Lat-Literal]

Presumably traitorous refers to a traitor and treacherous to the actions of said traitor.

Really?

Fair enough, I suppose.

I keep hearing the word "traitorous" - it almost sounds like a new word to me.

[gurnemanz]

Really?

Fair enough, I suppose.

I keep hearing the word "traitorous" - it almost sounds like a new word to me.

An anorak writes: Somewhat to my surprise, a Google search produces more hits for "traitorous" (46 million) than "treacherous" (29 million). My Chambers Etymological gives the first use of "traitorous" as the year 1380 - so not that new. The word clearly derives from "traitor", whereas "treacherous" derives from Old French "tricherie" meaning deceit or cheating, and leads directly to English "trickery". This would suggest that "treachery" has slightly broader connotations than just behaving like a traitor.

[Lat-Literal]

An anorak writes: Somewhat to my surprise, a Google search produces more hits for "traitorous" (46 million) than "treacherous" (29 million). My Chambers Etymological gives the first use of "traitorous" as the year 1380 - so not that new. The word clearly derives from "traitor", whereas "treacherous" derives from Old French "tricherie" meaning deceit or cheating, and leads directly to English "trickery". This would suggest that "treachery" has slightly broader connotations than just behaving like a traitor.

Thank you. We appear to have "that person is traitorous" but "this person's actions are treacherous" with treacherous broader, partially by virtue of not being as narrow as identity. Is this right? Additionally, is "trait" from the same lineage? If so, how? My problem with "traitorous" could be that it is unnecessary when we can simply say "a traitor". But I'm not sure.

[LMcD]

Thank you. We appear to have "that person is traitorous" but "this person's actions are treacherous" with treacherous broader, partially by virtue of not being as narrow as identity. Is this right? Additionally, is "trait" from the same lineage? If so, how? My problem with "traitorous" could be that it is unnecessary when we can simply say "a traitor". But I'm not sure.

Perhaps D Trump can't spell 'treacherous'.
In a similar vein, I've yet to find a satisfactory explanation of the difference(s) between 'illegitimate', 'illicit' and 'unlawful'.

[kernelbogey]

'takeaway' as in

Michael Cohen: Key takeaways from testimony (today's Guardian)

Always makes me think of Lamb Passanda, rice and nan .

Nothing wrong with any of them... but what happened to 'conclusions', 'assumptions' et al?

[teamsaint]

'takeaway' as in

Michael Cohen: Key takeaways from testimony (today's Guardian)

Always makes me think of Lamb Passanda, rice and nan .

Nothing wrong with any of them... but what happened to 'conclusions', 'assumptions' et al?

Oh those old expressions ? They ‘ve had their chips.

[cloughie]

'takeaway' as in

Michael Cohen: Key takeaways from testimony (today's Guardian)

Always makes me think of Lamb Passanda, rice and nan .

Nothing wrong with any of them... but what happened to 'conclusions', 'assumptions' et al?

When I first saw that I read it as Lamb Pasadena - a leisurely meal with the Temperance Seven as background music maybe!

[cloughie]

Oh those old expressions ? They ‘ve had their chips.

In the days when they as cheap as....

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Oh those old expressions ? They ‘ve had their chips.

Yes - they have to go.

[Bryn]

Yes - they have to go.

But who is to carry out your edict?

[Serial_Apologist]

But who is to carry out your edict?

The Popacy?

[DracoM]

Cricket - yes, I know, but wait.............

The word 'variations' seems to have disappeared from the vocab any commentator uses when describing the way bowlers can affect delivery of the different balls they bowl.
EVERY commentator now seems to be using the Robert Key neologism 'Change-ups'.

Why?? Oh, WHY?

[Serial_Apologist]

Cricket - yes, I know, but wait.............

The word 'variations' seems to have disappeared from the vocab any commentator uses when describing the way bowlers can affect delivery of the different balls they bowl.
EVERY commentator now seems to be using the Robert Key neologism 'Change-ups'.

Why?? Oh, WHY?

Because it offers a NEW SPIN on things.

[DracoM]

AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!

I asked for that............................