Discussion Groups / English Usage / November 2006

Yet the same people would readily understand "in an unfetching way",
which to me means essentially the same thing.

Thank you for reminding me of the term:-)

Marius Hancu

The book came out in 1910, and thus was written at a time when
Galsworthy's _Man of Property_ was being read and talked about -- that
was a 1906 work.  The central image of the earlier book is summarized
by a Wiki article:

"...The main character, Soames Forsyte, sees himself as a "man of
property," by virtue of his ability to accumulate material
possessions-but this does not succeed in bringing him pleasure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forsyte_Saga

I'm thinking that in the world of 1910, the sense of "untaking love"
would not have been regarded as a curious one owing to Soames'
obsessive acquisitiveness, time after time.

Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego

For what it's worth, that's the way I took it.  But I had to think about it.
I don't remember encountering "untaking" in this sense before.  Still, as
"un-" remains a productive suffix in contemporary English, there's no
reason to _not_ understand "untaking" if one can cast about for a sense of
"taking" that fits the context.

A Google on "untaking" reveals most usages of the word are where
"undertaking" is really meant, but a few where a previous definition of
"take" in some circumstance has been defined, and "untake" is meant to
be the reverse of that action. I was surprised to find the word does not
appear to have been used anywhere else in the sense in which Forster
uses it here.

Matthew Huntbach

It is said that love is a "Give-and-take" experience.
Perhaps untaking may indicate an unselfish love that gives but doesn't take.
Hard to apply that towards a house, though.

Fred