Attention Wordsmiths

time for another of lawman's pet peeves

[lawman]

I read and hear persons who obviously have a college degree who use the term "it begs the question" in such a manner to mean that "it raises the question". When I learned the term, it meant something else entirely.

How do you use it? If you don't use it, what do understand it to mean?

lawman

[mivox]

"begs the question" = avoids the question

But then "flammable" wasn't a word until enough otherwise educated people came to think "inflammable," when seen on tanks of gasoline and other inflammable substances, meant "non-flammable" rather than "able to be inflamed" (as long as we're on the subject of linguistic pet peeves).

And how about "I could care less" when someone clearly means "I couldn't care less..."

<added>
Good -- and utterly hilarious -- book on the general subject of such issues: BAD: Or, the Dumbing of America by Paul Fussel.
</added>

[digitalghost]

I use it when someone presents a a circular argument. Aristotle agrees with me. Prior Analytics 101. I suppose from a lawyer's point of view it would mean using the evidence in question to prove the evidence. In short, assuming the point in question is valid, and using the assumed validity to make the point.

But I'm sometimes called a prescriptivist... ;)

[iamlost]

I practice avoidance due to chronic misuse. Appropriate use is often misconstrued.

The origin of begs the question is the Latin petitio principii which translates to claiming a principle meaning an argument that is false because it relies on an assumed but not proven conclusion.

Begs the question has also come to mean (thanks IMHO to the media who, being largely illiterate, ignorant college graduates with a degree in football, are guilty of Crimes Against Language) addresses, poses, or raises the question.

From the 1997 Oxford Guide to Canadian English Usage:

In Canadian newspapers, 'begs the question' almost always means 'raises the question' or 'brings up the issue.' Although this usage is very common, it should probably be avoided because it is completely at odds with the formal meaning of the expression and constantly criticized by commentators."

[graywolf]

...gosh I hope this isn't going to be on the test ...

[2oddSox]

And how about "I could care less" when someone clearly means "I couldn't care less..."

I've seen and heard so many examples of this in recent times that I've started to wonder if I've been saying it wrong all these years.

[TheDoctor]

My pet peeve is "it's the exception that proves the rule". 99.99999999999999% (or more) of people who use this phrase seem to have absolutely no idea what it means, and use it as an excuse for obvious flaws in their arguments. They generally think that it's a comment about exceptions, when it's about proving, in the sense of testing, a rule.

What it means is that, if A causes B, you can show that this is the case by showing that when A does not happen, B does not happen. If B does happen when A does not happen, then the rule fails the proof, and is therefore wrong.

It's almost always used to mean the opposite - that if A doesn't happen but B does, then just ignore this incovenient fact. This pigs me off.

[diggle]

In England, "it begs the question" means the following:
Say there are a particular set of circumstances governing a situation which is unfavourable. You might say "This begs the question "What are we going to do about it?"
In other words, the circumstances demand that we look at what caused the situation.
A lot of people say that we should get out of the European Union. This begs the question : "How do we go about it?"
Beg, I think, in "begs the question", is simply another word for "demands".

[lawman]

>>I suppose from a lawyer's point of view it would mean using the evidence in question to prove the evidence.

I use it the way Mivox uses it.

[diggle]

"I use it the way Mivox uses it. "
Lawman. This begs the question - why do you do that?

I spotted this on the internet:

beg the question: Often misused or confused. Use this phrase only when you're questioning the logic of another statement--that it assumes as true the very point someone is trying to prove. This statement, for example, begs the question: We had to attack first to prevent him from attacking us. Don't use beg the question to suggest that someone is evading an issue or raising another question. But reduce confusion by avoiding the phrase. Instead, explain why you question the logic.

[Webwork]

I believe the original meaning of "begs the question" was "assumes the truth of a proposition that is open to doubt/question".

Since the subject statement is built upon a dubious assumption that statement therefore calls forth or 'begs for' the challenge.

People have transformed the phrase from "assuming the truth of that which is in doubt" to "the preceding statement leads or compels me to ask this rhetorical/other question".

The phrase has been transformed from a dramatic rhetorical device to a lazy man's transitional phrase, a sort of cliche segue: "This is what we/I/he was talking about, but now I wish to raise the opposing view". The locus of the focus has moved from 'you're assuming a lot, aren't you fella' to 'pay attention to this important question'.

[lawman]

>>I spotted this on the internet

I stand corrected. As long as it was found on the internet. ;)

[diggle]

Lawman. The Oxford Dictionary (which is the Bible of word meanings in the UK) says the following:
Beg the question:the correct definition is-
Assume the truth of thing to be proved or thing equivalent to it.
But also it says that a popular definition is :
evade difficulty.

So it looks like some folks use it one way and some folks the other... :)

[Fiver]

Well this certainly cleared things up.

I guess the one who truly understands what it means knows it depends on the speaker, and comprehends from context, because the confusion is long past set in now. Way to go .. umm, cultural inevitabilities!

And while we're on grammar nazi duty, a and lot are separate words, dagnabbit.

[lawman]

diggle:

Sounds like definition #1 was written by webwork, and definition #2 was written by Mivox, neither of which is your definition.

[diggle]

Lawman
I don't even understand my definition!

[lawman]

:)

[atadams]

Wilson Folletts's Modern American Usage states that "begging the question" means: "using as an argument somesome disguised for of the proposition in question; e.g., if the issue is the immorality of cannibalism, the argument How can it be moral to kill people in order to eat them? begs the question."

[digitalghost]

Gotta love tautologies.

I've become inured to the mangling of the language. Every time I hear someone say Marquis de Sade and pronounce Marquis like the title is a theater marquee I twitch a little, but I no longer feel compelled to mention it.

märkwis damnit, märkwis! ;) Okay, so maybe I still feel compelled to mention it... ;)

[edited by: digitalghost at 4:32 pm (utc) on June 11, 2004]

[Fiver]

so.. sadism is an oft discussed topic for you then?

;)

[digitalghost]

Only in certain circles Fiver, only in certain circles. ;)

[mivox]

I use it the way Mivox uses it.

Good enough for me. ;) As my mom always said, "Great minds thing alike."

But then, if you're using it in the circular argument sense, you really are just avoiding the original argument/question by presenting it as assumed truth, aren't you?

[digitalghost]

>>you really are just avoiding the original argument

Nah, you just use the phrase to point out the error in their reasoning. As in, "No Dilbert, that begs the question". Then move the discussion to the Marquis de Sade. Works like a charm.

Split your infinitives, dangle your participles, live a little!

[bcolflesh]

Marquis de Sade

American Heritage Dictionary:

[bartleby.com...]

has both pronunciations, but indicates that the "mar-ke" one is used for titles. Do people say "markwis" in the UK?

[digitalghost]

>Marquis

That's why I love these discussions. Going back to Middle English, and Indo-European roots, märkwis seems preferable. Used in conjunction with Marchioness, it simply sounds better, to my ears anyway.

[lawman]

I pronounce err "air" because "ur" sounds stupid. :)

[digitalghost]

>>sounds stupid

LOL You should see the looks I get when I mention that Chaucer doesn't rhyme with saucer...

Some of my other favorites, Goethe, spoken to rhyme with "quoth" and Goebbels spoken as if to rhyme with nobles.

[mivox]

Nah, you just use the phrase to point out the error in their reasoning.

You use "begs the question" to point out their error in reasoning. But their error in reasoning is really just a form of avoiding the question/issue at hand by using it as evidence of itself.

So, "begs the questions" is really just referring to avoiding the point either way...

(I hope that made sense. It made sense in my head... ;) )

<added>In all fairness, the Goethe/Goebbels thing is more a product of the german 'oe' sound in question not existing in American english, than it is of outright ignorance...</added>

[digitalghost]

>>than it is of outright ignorance

I beg to differ. It is exactly a product of their ignorance, but I always take "ignorance" to mean "unaware" rather than equate ignorance to stupidity or low intelligence.

Above all, I value individuals that are well read. If merely for my own selfish purpose of enjoying quality conversation on a variety of topics. I'm not above letting my participles dangle. ;) I don't get upset when people refer to Wagner without saying "Vagner".

I just love to roll around in all those words like a colt in a field of sweet clover. I understand that language is dynamic. Unless understanding is lost, the rules can be bent.

Got any room for some Mustangs on your place? I'm out of room... ;)

[deejay]

There's a bloke here in NZ who writes a regular 'in defence of the language'-type column in a national paper. Often a good read, and he discussed 'begs the question' a month or so ago.

If I remember correctly, his take was that the phrase was usually a nonsense and shouldn't be used at all. The basis was that a situation (or whatever was being discussed) is not sentient or capable of action, and therefore can't 'beg' anything, let alone a question.