Often they spring seemingly from nowhere. Take
dog. For centuries the word in English was hound (or hund). Then suddenly in
the late Middle Ages, dog–—a word etymologically unrelated to any other
known word—displaced it. No one has any idea why. This sudden arising of
words happens more often than you might think. Among others without known
pedigree are jaw, jam, bad, big, gloat, fun, crease, pour, put, niblick (the golf
club), noisome, numskull, jalopy, and countless others. Blizzard suddenly
appeared in the nineteenth century in America (the earliest use is attributed to
Davy Crockett) and rowdy appeared at about the same time. Recent examples of
this phenomenon are yuppie and sound bites, which seem to have burst forth
spontaneously and spread with remarkable rapidity throughout the English-
speaking world.Other words exist in the language for hundreds of years, either as dialect words
or as mainstream words that have fallen out of use, before suddenly leaping to
prominence—again quite mysteriously.
Scrounge and seep are both of this type. They have been around for centuries
and yet neither, according to Robert Burchfield [The English Language, page
46], came into general use before 1900.
Many words are made up by writers. According to apparently careful
calculations, Shakespeare used 17,6 77 words in his writings, of which at least
one tenth had never been used before.
Imagine if every tenth word you wrote were original. It is a staggering display of
ingenuity. But then Shakespeare lived in an age when words and ideas burst
upon the world as never before or since. For a century and a half, from 1500 to
1650, English flowed with new words. Between 10,000 and 12,000 words were
coined, of which about half still exist. Not until modern times would this number
be exceeded, but even then there is no comparison. The new words of today
represent an explosion of technology—words like lunar module and myocardial
infarction—rather than of poetry and feeling. Consider the words that
Shakespeare alone gave us, barefaced, critical, leapfrog, monumental, castigate,
majestic, obscene, frugal, radiance, dwindle, countless, submerged, excellent,
fretful, gust, hint, hurry, lonely, summit, pedant, and some 1,685 others. How
would we manage without them? He might well have created even more except
that he had to bear in mind the practicalities of being instantly apprehended by
an audience. Shakespeare's vocabulary changed considerably as he aged.
Jespersen notes that there are some zoo to 300 words to be found in the early
plays that are never repeated. Many of these were provincialisms that he later
shed, but which independently made their way into the language later—among
them cranny, beautified, homicide, aggravate, and forefathers. It has also been
observed by scholars that the new terms of his younger years appeal directly to
the senses (snow-white, fragrant, brittle) while the coinages of the later years are
more often concerned with psychological considerations.
Shakespeare was at the center of this remarkable verbal outburst but not alone in
it. Ben Jonson gave us damp, defunct, clumsy, and strenuous among many other
useful terms. Isaac Newton coined centrifugal and centripetal. Sir Thomas More came up with absurdity, acceptance, exact, explain, and exaggerate. The classical
scholar Sir Thomas Elyot fathered, among others, animate, exhaust, and
modesty. Coleridge produced intensify, Jeremy Bentham produced international
(and apologized for its inelegance), Thomas Carlyle gave us decadent and
environment. George Bernard Shaw thought up superman.
Many new coinages didn't last—often for obvious reasons. Jonson's less
inspired efforts included ventositous and obstupefact.
Shakespeare gave us the useful gloomy, but failed with barky and brisky (formed
after the same pattern but somehow never catching on) and failed equally with
conflux, vastidity, and tortive. Milton found no takers for inquisiturient, while,
later still, Dickens tried to give the world vocular. The world didn't want it.
Sometimes words are made up for a specific purpose. The U.S.
Army in 1974 devised a food called funistrada as a test word during a survey of
soldiers' dietary preferences. Although no such food existed, funistrada ranked
higher in the survey than lima beans and eggplant (which seems about right to
me, at least as far as the lima beans go).
According to Mary Helen Dohan, in her absorbing book Our Own Words, the
military vehicle the tank got its name because during its secretive experimental
phase people were encouraged to think it was a storage receptacle—hence a
tank. The curiously nautical terminology for its various features—hatch, turret,
hull, deck—arises from the fact that it was developed by the British Admiralty
rather than the Army.