 |
 | 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 / January 2004I actually have a vocabulary question, but this group is the closest newsgroup I've found...
I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of me, and I've been trying to find out what the word is. Does anyone know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or doing nothing of import? I think the word was synonymous with "cushy job" or something along those lines. It was one word though, and I seem to remember it being used in an example to refer to a position one would give to, say, a relative of a VIP; the person would really be getting paid a lot for doing nothing while being immune to being fired, etc. Anyway, if anyone knows the word I'm trying to recall, please email me to let me know. Thanks. ragedyann@hotmail.com spake thus: > I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I > remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > fired, etc. Anyway, if anyone knows the word I'm trying to recall, > please email me to let me know. Thanks. Sinecure. It's an ecclesiastical term.  SignatureDavid ===== > ragedyann@hotmail.com spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> useless or doing nothing of import? > > Sinecure. It's an ecclesiastical term. You drove me to the dictionary, not for the first time. I note 'sinecure', for the ecclesiasts, is specifically a benefice without cure of souls. But presumably, there were benefices, not involving pastoral duties, which were nevertheless quite hard work. So how did it come to mean 'job involving mo work whatsoever' for the seculars? -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply >> ragedyann@hotmail.com spake thus: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >nevertheless quite hard work. So how did it come to mean 'job involving mo >work whatsoever' for the seculars? Driven to the dictionary, I find that 'benefice' means an office permanently endowed to provide a living. Maybe they could slow down after they got appointed. -- john In our last episode, <fsvtvv06k6tq63ndn7hemttgp19pidb5o5@4ax.com>, the lovely and talented John O'Flaherty broadcast on alt.usage.english: >>> ragedyann@hotmail.com spake thus: >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>nevertheless quite hard work. So how did it come to mean 'job involving mo >>work whatsoever' for the seculars? > Driven to the dictionary, I find that 'benefice' means an office > permanently endowed to provide a living. Maybe they could slow down > after they got appointed. So it would be like tenure? SignatureLars Eighner -finger for geek code- eighner@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/ The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to watch someone else do it wrong without comment. --Theodore H. White john-dean@frag.lineone.net spake thus: > > ragedyann@hotmail.com spake thus: > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > You drove me to the dictionary, not for the first time. Who, sir? Me, sir? If you enjoyed the journey, I will drive you again. But I expect a tip, you know. > I note 'sinecure', > for the ecclesiasts, is specifically a benefice without cure of souls. But > presumably, there were benefices, not involving pastoral duties, which were > nevertheless quite hard work. So how did it come to mean 'job involving mo > work whatsoever' for the seculars? I had never analysed the word before, but it's blindingly obvious, of course. Sine cura. I'll be blowed. I suppose it evolved via the clergy, where it came to mean a paid position without responsibility, from where the jump to atheist-land is no jump at all. SignatureDavid ===== >You drove me to the dictionary, not for the first time. I note 'sinecure', >for the ecclesiasts, is specifically a benefice without cure of souls. But >presumably, there were benefices, not involving pastoral duties, which were >nevertheless quite hard work. So how did it come to mean 'job involving mo >work whatsoever' for the seculars? I wonder if your presumption's correct. Maybe they were all like the one which, with its associated stipend, Darcy so unfeelingly denied to Wickham. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove number to reply > I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I > remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > fired, etc. Anyway, if anyone knows the word I'm trying to recall, > please email me to let me know. Thanks. sinecure, maybe? > I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I > remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of > me, and I've been trying to find out what the word is. Does anyone > know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or > doing nothing of import? I think the word was synonymous with "cushy > job" or something along those lines. [...] [COD10] sinecure /"sVInIkjU@, "sIn-/ · n. a position requiring little or no work but giving the holder status or financial benefit. – DERIVATIVES sinecurism n. sinecurist n. – ORIGIN C17: from L. sine cura ‘without care’. > Anyway, if anyone knows the word I'm trying to recall, > please email me to let me know. Thanks. Crap. I had to go back and grab your address from the original post. I've done it this time, but it is grossly impolite to ask for e-mail. Doing so says, "I'm so damn important that I won't bother with your newsgroup. You, on the other hand, are such a loser that you sit around waiting to answer my questions." SignatureMartin Ambuhl mambuhl@earthlink.net spake thus: > > I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I > > remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > on the other hand, are such a loser that you sit around waiting to answer > my questions." Ah, but you went to the trouble to explain. I, OTOH, read the request and ignored it. SignatureDavid ===== >> I remember seeing a word in a vocabulary book sometime ago. I >> remember the definition, but I can't remember the word for the life of [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Crap. I had to go back and grab your address from the original post. Darn! I also have to go back and delete my answer in this thread because you already gave a better explanation. >I've >done it this time, but it is grossly impolite to ask for e-mail. I won't do it [delete my answer] even though it's extremely irritating to have answered a question that was already answered in a superior way. Martin: >Crap. I had to go back and grab your address from the original post. I've >done it this time, but it is grossly impolite to ask for e-mail. Doing so >says, "I'm so damn important that I won't bother with your newsgroup. You, >on the other hand, are such a loser that you sit around waiting to answer >my questions." Oh, stop with the lecturing bullshit! *Anyone* in their right mind wouldn't feel safe coming back here after a first visit. This place is so full of egos, dickheads, and loonies, you probably scared the poor girl away! She's *gone* and even *still* you're lecturing her! Jesus Christ! If you think asking to be emailed is impolite, it's not wonder half of my comments are considered outright obscene! BTW, your writing the above says: "I'm so damn important that I think I can force you to do things a certain way 'because *I* said so'. You, on the other hand, are such a moron for not realizing better"! So shut, yo' mouth! > Oh, stop with the lecturing bullshit! Thank you for your excellent advice. I'll file it in the appropriate place. > *Anyone* in their right mind wouldn't > feel safe coming back here after a first visit. This place is so full of egos, > dickheads, and loonies, you probably scared the poor girl away! Not according to the e-mail reply I got from her. > She's *gone* > and even *still* you're lecturing her! Jesus Christ! If you think asking to > be emailed is impolite, it's not wonder half of my comments are considered > outright obscene! Perhaps your choice of vocabulary has something to do with it. Perhaps it's because you post obscenities. SignatureMartin Ambuhl Martin: >> Oh, stop with the lecturing bullshit! > >Thank you for your excellent advice. I'll file it in the appropriate place. Good! As should always be done when I'm the one giving advice. >This place is so full of egos, >> dickheads, and loonies, you probably scared the poor girl away! > >Not according to the e-mail reply I got from her. So she agreed with me, eh? >Perhaps your choice of vocabulary has something to do with it. Perhaps >it's because you post obscenities. Well, your choice of rudeness factor sure didn't do anything to bring the nice woman back here! Better to be *true* to yourself, like me and my obscenities are, than to be phoney in order to scare innocents off. I'm *sooooooo* sure you nevah cuss! >Does anyone >know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or >doing nothing of import? Sinecure. In Latin "sine"=without. I guess "cure" means something like effort,but I'm not sure. On 09 Jan 2004, Arcadian Rises wrote >> Does anyone know a word for a job/position/post that is >> effectively useless or doing nothing of import? > Sinecure. In Latin "sine"=without. I guess "cure" means something > like effort,but I'm not sure. I know you've followed up elsewhere in the thread to the definition that mentioned the "without care" derivation of sinecure, but thought I'd note that sinecure -- as I understand it -- is an ecclesiastical term. In terms of the church, the "cure" that one is "sine" is the care of souls -- that is, a sinecure has income without pastoral responsbilities. (That's as opposed to a curate, who takes on the care of souls for the vicar, who vicariously occupies the position of the rector.) SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) harvey.news@ntlworld.com spake thus: > On 09 Jan 2004, Arcadian Rises wrote > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > (That's as opposed to a curate, who takes on the care of souls for the > vicar, who vicariously occupies the position of the rector.) If the curate is doing the vicar's work, and the vicar is standing in for the rector, what's the rector up to? Practicing being straight, perhaps? SignatureDavid ===== On 09 Jan 2004, david56 wrote > harvey.news@ntlworld.com spake thus: -snip- >> In terms of the church, the "cure" that one is "sine" is the care >> of souls -- that is, a sinecure has income without pastoral [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > in for the rector, what's the rector up to? Practicing being > straight, perhaps? Traditionally, just receiving the income he has the rights to... SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) david56 filted: >harvey.news@ntlworld.com spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >for the rector, what's the rector up to? Practicing being straight, >perhaps? One of my late stepfather's favorite punchlines seems to fit here: "Rector? Hell, he damn near *killed* her!"...r > >Does anyone > >know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or > >doing nothing of import? > > Sinecure. In Latin "sine"=without. I guess "cure" means something like > effort,but I'm not sure. A sinecure may be a little different: it's a position without duties. A job with a non-empty set of useless or trivial duties is something else. "Vice-President of the United States" is the epitome of such jobs. Some related terms: "Featherbedding" is requiring an employer to staff a position solely for the purpose of increasing union employment; positions that exist because of featherbedding are often sinecures of a sort. "Goldbricking" is the art of making it look like you are doing something important when you are not. This is a survival skill. SignatureChris Green > arcadianrises@aol.com (Arcadian Rises) wrote > > >Does anyone > > >know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "Goldbricking" is the art of making it look like you are doing > something important when you are not. This is a survival skill. In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them up. SignatureBest - Donna Richoux >> "Goldbricking" is the art of making it look like you are doing >> something important when you are not. This is a survival skill. > >In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them >up. I've never heard boondoggling used as a means to keep people occupied, and boondoggle is a word I've heard many times, since it is often pops up in US government circles. This is how the word is commonly used in the US: a government worker is said to have gone on a boondoggle if he arranges a trip to sunny San Diego, for example, at taxpayer's expense when he has no valid reason to go there. Boondoggles usually involve petty graft; if not, they probably aren't proper "boondoggles". SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>> "Goldbricking" is the art of making it look like you are doing >>> something important when you are not. This is a survival skill. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > there. Boondoggles usually involve petty graft; if not, they > probably aren't proper "boondoggles". The RHUD has both definitions, more or less: "2. work of little or no value done merely to keep or look busy. 3. a project funded by the federal government out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation." The latter is how I've always thought of it. But the most interesting definition is the first: "1. a product of simple manual skill, as a plaited leather cord for the neck or a knife sheath, made typically by a camper or a scout." It was purportedly invented by a scoutmaster. SignatureRay Heindl (remove the Xs to reply) >In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them >up. I would never use it that way. My boondoggle is a scheme to get money by creating a worthless venture. > >In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to > >keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them > >up. > > I would never use it that way. My boondoggle is a scheme to get money > by creating a worthless venture. One in which the profit goes to the creator? Like a scam or elaborate con job? I always heard it with that "makework" element of creating useless jobs. Depression era. Not that I was around then, but my parents were. However, I guess the word "boondoggle" has been used for a wide variety of "extravagant and useless projects," according to RHHDAS. For example, a recent use is 1992 Boondoggle n. Business trip whose location is chosen for travel/vacation motives. For origin of the verb, they quote the Chicago Tribune of 1935: To the cowboy it meant the making of saddle trappings out of odds and ends of leather, and they boondoggled when there was nothing else to do on the ranch. You see how that could mean "keeping busy." The subsequent quotes tend not to be very illustrative, but here's one: 1939: It's a nice park they're building... and they're not boondoggling. We can only guess what the speaker meant, but I would think it relates to producing something useful. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux > > >In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to > > >keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > However, I guess the word "boondoggle" has been used for a wide variety > of "extravagant and useless projects," according to RHHDAS. [snip additional useful information] I think the word "featherbedding" ought to fit in here somewhere. Here's the definition from AHD4 online: "The practice of requiring an employer to hire more workers than are needed or to limit their production in keeping with a safety regulation or union rule." SignatureBob Lieblich Making work for himself >> >In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >> >keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >One in which the profit goes to the creator? Like a scam or elaborate >con job? It's not a firm definition, so give me a little slack in answering. Consider, though, that a person or group develops a project to do something generally considered to be without value - like determining the average length of those caterpillars that destroy tomato plants - and obtain government grant funding for the project. That would be a boondoggle. Knowing the average length is of no value. If the study was to determine a way to prevent the caterpillars from destroying the plant, it would not be a boondoggle. Part of the essence of a boondoggle is the viewer's opinion that the venture is worthless. That does not mean that the participants feel the venture is worthless. There are many projects and programs in which the participants feel they are doing something worthwhile, but their efforts are viewed as a boondoggle by others. The participants may or may not profit from a boondoggle. There just has to be money spent. >>In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >>keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them >>up. > >I would never use it that way. My boondoggle is a scheme to get money >by creating a worthless venture. That is not properly called a boondoggle either. The point of a boondoggle is never to *get* money you don't deserve, but to *spend* it, if the difference, Mr Wonderful, is not too subtle to evade you. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>>In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >>>keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >boondoggle is never to *get* money you don't deserve, but to *spend* >it, if the difference, Mr Wonderful, is not too subtle to evade you. I think I could pull off a boondoggle and get a government grant to analyze the construction of your last sentence. > >>>In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to > >>>keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I think I could pull off a boondoggle and get a government grant to > analyze the construction of your last sentence. Sorry, mate, been done. They call that angle "linguistics". Mike. >> >>>In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >> >>>keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Sorry, mate, been done. They call that angle "linguistics". There's an established field of Riggsonian Linguistics? I suppose there's enough source data, but one would think they'd go for something simpler to decipher like Joeyismics. >>>>In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just to >>>>keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others fill them [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I think I could pull off a boondoggle and get a government grant to >analyze the construction of your last sentence. Can new ideas sink into that concrete block you have for a head? Are you capable of learning at all, or are you just like Young Joey in that respect? You're still misusing the word. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>> In the same vein, "boondoggling" is creating meaningless tasks just >>> to keep people employed, such as having some dig holes and others [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > boondoggle is never to *get* money you don't deserve, but to *spend* > it, if the difference, Mr Wonderful, is not too subtle to evade you. This could be where "junket" comes in -- politicians, especially, taking fun-type trips at the public expense. I wonder... maybe running for office would be a good idea now that I have the time to travel. SignatureMaria Conlon Please send any email to the Hot Mail address. "Maria Conlon" <mariaconlon001@hotmail.com> wrote on 13 Jan 2004: [...] > This could be where "junket" comes in -- politicians, especially, > taking fun-type trips at the public expense. "Junket" . . . isn't that some kind of dessert? Something a little sweet to top off dinner (feeding at the public trough)? > I wonder... maybe running for office would be a good idea now that > I have the time to travel. Welcome back, Maria! It's good to see your name in the "From" column again. SignatureFranke: EFL teacher & medical editor. > This could be where "junket" comes in -- politicians, especially, taking > fun-type trips at the public expense. According to my dictionary, "junket" comes from the rush basket in which you carry the party food. A day-junket is a jaunt. > "Goldbricking" is the art of making it look like you are doing > something important when you are not. This is a survival skill. That's not how I understand the word. From MW10: : to shirk duty or responsibility The key element is the avoidance of work, not the appearance of work. On the other hand, MW10 has the following as a noun: 1 a : a worthless brick that appears to be of gold b : something that appears to be valuable but is actually worthless 2 : a person who shirks assigned work I can see how 1b could be applied as you state, but I don't recall ever hearing the word used this way. Richard R. Hershberger [...] > Does anyone > know a word for a job/position/post that is effectively useless or [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > be getting paid a lot for doing nothing while being immune to being > fired, etc. In cacademia: tenure In labo(u)r unions: featherbedding SignatureReinhold (Rey) Aman Santa Rosa, CA 95402, USA http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/contents13.html --------------------------------------- "Like most here, I rarely read Rey. ... I recommend that you avoid Rey's posts. They're not worth it." -- John Dean, 21 November 2003 |
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.