Forum Moderators: not2easy
So I'd echo the previous vote for "small".
Eliz.
sundries - "small miscellaneous items"
-and-
sundry - "various; miscellaneous"So when I hear "sundry things" I think of different, not necessarily related, items. Size doesn't even figure into the equation.
This semantic difference is important. In fact, I looked up sundry in an online dictionary and found the same definition. So that's why I inquired here. I'm planning to use the phrase:
"small and sundry things"
I do not want suggest large items. Therefore, I'm not sure if use of the word "small" will help qualify or quantify the use of the word "sundry" in that context.
What do you think? Thank you.
It may be a case where there's a connotation that goes beyond the actual definition. One aspect of my copy editing at my day job is catching things like that, especially when an author likes to use "big words" but doesn't always understand their nuances. (Wish I could think of an example...)
When I hear "sundry," I connect it with the connotation of being small, probably because I'm old enough to remember stores that sold "sundries," which were normally small items. But younger folks may not make that mental connection, in which case the addition of "small" might be helpful.
Hmmm, maybe if the word seems odd today, I shouldn't use the word at all. I'm also old enough to have heard the word used without trying having to run to a dictionary.
Then again, I'm an equal opportunity writer. The title is going to use the word "stuff" instead of using words such as things, items, products. :~)
shallow: aka digicamhelp