My I.P. Thesaurus Word Finder!
The aim of a thesaurus word finder is to provide lists of useful synonyms or near synonyms. Yes, yes, very laudable but what is the point? We already have too many words. Some have hardly been used, or haven’t been used at all as they are still in their wrappers. So, why do we need to draw attention to this over supply by creating a thesaurus?
Adam Smith would be outraged by this because it flies in the face of his Law of Supply and Demand. What is the point in having all these words when so many spend their entire life being ignored? For this reason, I feel I must speak up for the silent majority. The words that are so cruelly ignored or, even worse, used once then cast aside in favour of some newer more fashionable word. I feel for these orphaned words, who can they turn to for help and support?
There are no organizations devoted to looking after these poor abandoned words. Where is Esther Rantzen when she’s needed? Where are the psychiatrists, behaviourists and life coaches? These words need help or, mark my words, blood will be spilt. We carry on ignoring them at our peril. Adam Smith was on the right track when he wrote about the Law of Supply and Demand, incidentally using as many words as he could in a one man effort to create a demand that would bring equilibrium to the supply chain.
In his ‘Wealth of Nations’, Adam Smith did his absolute best to use as many words as he could but even he could not use them all. In a vain attempt to use all the words in the dictionary he first created his Law of Supply and Demand but when that didn’t use up enough he then went on to, my own particular favourite, the Division of Labour which I thought was a very good idea because when I was in labour I would have jumped at the chance of having it divided up or shared out.
Anyhow, to get back to my point his book used up quite a few words but there were still loads left that had not been used. Oh, no, it seems I have mis-read the section on Division of Labour as it seems he was talking about pricks. He noticed workers were more efficient if they tackled just one part of the manufacturing process rather than seeing the whole thing through to the end and to illustrate this point he used pins. One worker would make only the shaft and another worker would make the pin head. So one was a shafter and the other a pin head but they were still capable of delivering a nasty prick! And a person would have to be extremely fortunate not to have had experience of some such incident at some point in their life.
Anyway, Adam Smith felt that these unused words were such a waste of a fine resource that, in desperation, he passed the baton on to his friend David Hume, now he was a man to be reckoned with as far as words were concerned because he scattered words in every direction. One has only to read his Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals to see that he made a very real attempt at using as many words as was humanly possible and for this reason I feel indebted to him for his contribution which can be authenticated by just reading his book. I hope the reader will notice that I could just have said 'seen' but where I can I try to give an outing to a little used word, which I put down to the softer or more humanitarian side of my nature. Now if you could just see the reaction of authenticated you would understand why I do what I do because it’s grinning from a to d. Humanitarian seems pleased too so that gives me a nice warm glow.
The above examples were people who really cared about words by doing everything in their power to see that none were neglected. However we now come to a person who was the very antitheses of what they were about. Held up as an example of what we should be aiming for, this man, so trusted, has been allowed entry in to our schools to freely promulgate his filth. Yes, I speak of that odious man Shakespeare who has built his dubious reputation on his ability to be economic with words. What a bloody cheek! How could he be so unfeeling with all them poor neglected and ignored words left to fend for themselves. If he were alive today I think he would have been brought to book for crimes against words.
In the light of the above perhaps I should set up some sort of charity or word foundation that would hold fund raising events in order to support out of work or redundant words. Better still raise enough funds to provide a sort of clinic where words that had come to the end of their useful life could be helped in to the afterlife of a pocket version of a thesaurus. I know many people will have strong views on this saying it is morally wrong but my view is that such a move should not be considered as an assisted move no it is more an act of mercy.
Now I think it is time to state where I think the blame lies for all these extra words that lie dormant in the Dictionary. When I write Dictionary I should also have written culprit because therein lies the root of the problem. Yes, it is the Dictionary which is at fault or rather the individual who compiled this dreadful work and it is that same person who had the temerity to send it to the printers in first draft stage. This was not only lazy but careless to boot. Who in their right mind would send a first draft copy of any document, let alone something of this magnitude, to the printers without at least making some attempt at editing? The guilty party should have edited out all unnecessary words or words that made no sense, words such as …abbreviation. A word that I think you will agree is quite long but what does it mean, why it means…to shorten!
Now we come to the many people who claim to have been the author of this wondrous work. First there is this chap called Oxford, then there is another chap called Collins and finally someone calling himself Brewer’s but he doesn’t just stop at claiming the Dictionary. No, this cheeky blighter adds that his is a dictionary of Phrase and Fable. Who does he think he’s fooling? The only time I have heard the name Brewer’s is in connection with something called droop!
Next we come to the most laughable of all the many editions of dictionaries. I refer, of course, to the Oxford Concise English Dictionary! Just who are they trying to kid? Have you seen how many words are in this ‘concise’ edition? There are words on every page, in fact, each and every page is full of words from top to bottom. Concise…my fat fundament! As the reader can see, I am still trying to do my best by these poor humiliated words by bringing one out whenever I can to see the light of day. Certainly fundament cast an appreciative glance my way.
So, we must look at various methods to rid ourselves of this problem of overproduction of words and my first suggestion is to get rid of a number of under used words. Now let me see…what words could we let go? Perhaps we should start with A for arse because we already have fundament. B for bastard because there are plenty of those. C for…no, absolutely not! I will not be party to words like cowardice. D for dastardly…who uses dastardly? E for excrement because I am already fed up with this shit. F for you know f*** all about it.
That is one way of dealing with the problem but there are others and here are a couple more suggestions: Always use as many words as possible, give words as Christmas presents and finally sell them at boot fares and the like. Do remember, however, that words have meanings too so don’t just trample over them. Better still become a befriender as that is a really positive and pro-active thing to do.
It can now easily be seen that these methods do not go far enough and that something more fundamental is necessary. Therefore, my final proposal is that, drastic though it may be, we should get rid of the thesaurus because its stated purpose is to come up with words of a similar meaning. This kind of behaviour is subversive to say the least. Something I am desperately trying not to do…say the least, that is! No, I am doing my level best to say the most but if anyone cares to make a study of this piece they will see that even I have not been able to use little more than one thousand six hundred and five words. Something I regard as a very poor attempt at being verbose. Therefore, I think that, cruel though it may be, it is time for a cull! If getting rid of the thesaurus is a step too far then my only other suggestion is go to church and confess your synonyms!