Re: Sarcasm

["Lee Daniel Crocker (none)" <lcrocker@MERCURY.COLOSSUS.NET>]

> I was going to use the word sarcasm earlier, but _just in case_, I
> looked "sarcasm" and "irony" up in my little dictionary.  It defined
> sarcasm as: "1. A cutting or contemptuous remark. 2. Ironical criticism
> or reproach."  Irony was defined as "1. the use of words to express the
> opposite of what one really means." (other definition not applicable.)
>
> "Irony" seems to be the more inclusive of the two words, and seems more
> appropriate considering that we are discussing using attitudinals to say
> the opposite of what is meant.
>
> _I_ would have started the discussion using the word sarcasm but, after
> looking up the two definitions, it seemed that Ashley was smarter to use
> "irony."
>
> Unless you want to say Mr. Webster is wrong. %^O

Yes, your dictionary is a bad one: or at least, it's being too
/descriptive/ rather than /prescriptive/.  Ideally, a dictionary
should serve two purposes: to help someone who encouters a word for
the first find out what the speaker probably meant (even if the
speaker is using a less-than-ideal usage, for which a descriptive
dictionary like Merriam-Webster is good), and to help a writer
learn how to use a word for best effect and maximum clarity (for
which a more prescriptive dictionary like American Heritage excels).

It is the natural progression of language that negative connotations
tend to drive out positive or neutral ones (for example, "reek" and
"stink" were used positively in early English; the currently-neutral
"smell" is becoming more negative as time passes; "fragrance" will
probably be used negatively by our grandchildren).  "Sarcasm" has
suffered the same fate: it used to mean simply expressing the opposite
of what was meant for rhetorical effect (positive or negative), but
is more often used negatively, hence the descriptions of contempt/
criticism/reproach.

While sarcasm is often plainly expressed by the language of a remark
or intonation or facial expression, irony more subtly involves the
context or the situation itself, rather than a specific remark.  It
s ironic that William Safire, a well-known misogynist, made "Ms."
acceptable to many newspapers when he used it do describe Geraldine
Ferraro (in his words, he didn't want to "dignify" her maiden name
with the title of "Mrs." because her husband's name was Zaccaro), but
that irony is not any particular remark, but the situation itself.

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC