 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009redhibitory (?!)
What on earth is that thing a misprint for? "Onslow’s lyric scores were dense and unusually complex for the audience, and since their libretto were not of great value (a redhibitory defect in those days, especially in France), the operas were praised out of regards only, although the critics loved them and although Berlioz himself enthusiastically defended the Duke of Guise.) http://www.classical-composers.org/comp/onslow >What on earth is that thing a misprint for? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >http://www.classical-composers.org/comp/onslow It might not be a misprint. OED: redhibitory Of or pertaining to redhibition. redhibition Civil Law. (See quot. 1727-41.) The nature of the evidence leaves it doubtful whether the word has ever been actually in English use; the entry in Chambers is translated from the Dict. de Trévoux (1721). 1656 BLOUNT Glossogr. (copying Cotgr.), Redhibition, restitution of a thing to him that sold it; the causing of one by Law to take that again, which he sold. 1727-41 CHAMBERS Cycl., Redhibition, in the civil law, an action allowed a buyer, whereby to annul the sale of some moveable,..upon the buyer's finding it damaged, or that there was some personal cheat, etc. I haven't yet been able to fit that meaning into the text you quoted.  SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.english.usage) >>What on earth is that thing a misprint for? >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >I haven't yet been able to fit that meaning into the text you quoted. I think I have now! (Shouldn't it be plural "libretti"?) their libretti were not of great value (a redhibitory defect in those days, especially in France) Paraphrase: their libretti were not of great value (a cause for the money paid for them to be returned, especially in France) SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.english.usage) On 28 May 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote >>> What on earth is that thing a misprint for? >>> >>> "Onslow’s lyric scores were dense and unusually complex for >>> the audience, and since their libretto were not of great value -snip- > (Shouldn't it be plural "libretti"?) P'raps; "librettos" would certainly be defendable. But "libretto" as a plural is just plain wrong. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 28 May 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > P'raps; "librettos" would certainly be defendable. But "libretto" > as a plural is just plain wrong. Might it also be defensible? Chris R On 29 May 2009, Chris R wrote >> On 28 May 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Might it also be defensible? Sure, if you like. I tend to prefer "defendable" for "can be defended" unless I want to somehow associate it with being defensive. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed JHM a écrit : > What on earth is that thing a misprint for? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > http://www.classical-composers.org/comp/onslow The article was translated from the French. I'd have translated "défaut rédhibitoire" --a cliché in French-- as "insuperable defect": the low quality of the libretto totally marred the enjoyment of the audience. SignatureIsabelle Cecchini |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.