One can construct a word by adding "ness" to an adjective, but when a
word already exists that sounds fluent and emphatic (duplicity), it makes
for clumsy style. My students are prone to "evilness" for "evil" and
"beautifulness" for "beauty." The effect is loss.
Date sent: Sun, 12 May 2002 11:34:44 -0400
Send reply to: [log in to unmask]
From: "Rickard A. Parker" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Printing of Eliot's work
I decided to check this out myself. I would say that it was the facts
about the dealing over the publication of TWL that may cause one to think
that Eliot was double dealing and not statements or nuances by Rainey.
Also, I think I would consider what was going on a case of hardball
business dealing rather than duplicitousness (is that a word?)
"Rickard A. Parker" wrote:
> Erwin Welsch wrote:
> > Rainey also suggests that Eliot was duplicitous in seeking various,
> > and sometimes conflicting, publishing outlets during 1922. But that
> > is another topic entirely.
> Then Ken Armstrong wrote:
> > Cheap thrills, Mr. Welsch? Lucky for us Rainey is "a cautious writer."
> A second chance here.
> Would you really rather say "Rainey also suggests that Eliot was
> duplicitous" or that the facts of the dealings suggest that Eliot was
> duplicitous? Or is there some other wording that you think would be
> Rick Parker