Right, but in modern usage the distinction is needlessly pedantic and contradicts the dictionary. Merriam-Webster flat out says the second definition of podium is lectern and that’s been in common usage as such since at least the mid 20th century.
1 Like
Ugh, there’s no phrase as grating as a language-peever’s pseudo-explanations. I’m sure that guy has very original and persuasive opinions on double negatives too. But it does make me wonder how the article escaped from “set foot”. Off hand I can’t think of another construction like it.
2 Likes
Great question! I haven’t been able to find any explanation for it. The OED has attestations going back to circa 1225, so my best guess is this used to be a common way to phrase things, but it died out over the centuries, and now only survives in fossilized phrases. The only other one I can think of is “lay hands on” (which also goes back to the 1200s per the OED), but you can also lay “a hand” or “your hands” on someone.
Surely there must be a rule, in the same vein as Godwin’s Law, about how linguistic discussions devolve into peeving.
Actually the phrase ‘lay hands on’ is used a few times in the King James Version of the Bible. which to my mind is well before the 1200s.
Much later I’m afraid—as far as I know, the King James Version was published in the early 1600s.
1 Like
“Lay hands on” has a plural noun in it though, like “put tires on”, so it’s grammatically typical.
‘Put pen to paper’?
2 Likes
I was thinking the King James version was published in 1610 or 1612… though Google’s snippet of the Wikipedia article gives the publication date as 1611… Though I’ve heard the KJV was a bit archaic in its word choices even when it was new… and it’s kind of at the limits of how old an English text can get and still be comprehensible to modern readers with some effort… too bad the Bible is an absolute bore to read even in modern translation… Though now I’m wondering if there are any idioms from the Canterbury Tales(an English text old enough it needs translation to be comprehensible to anyone who has studied the history of English extensively) that survive unaltered to the modern day.
Though, speaking of the bible, one bit of linguistic trivia I like is in regards to one of the Ten Commandments, namely the one most commonly translated as “Thou Shalt Not take the Lord’s name in vain.” As I understand it, in Hebrew, the common interpretation is to never speak the name associated with the Tetragrammaton(a label meaning 4-lettered word in Greek, which I find funny considering how we use that expression to refer to many of the common English swears), commonly transliterated in Roman letters as YHWH or JHVH and rendered pronounceable in English as Yahweh or Jehovah, to the point that Hebrew versions of scripture routinely include instructions to use the Hebrew words for God or Lord whenever the name appears in text and the text omitting the marks that indicate which vowels to be used, leading to uncertainty in how the name is even meant to be pronounced. However, most English translations of the Bible just omit the name altogether, using the english words God or the Lord(sometimes stylized in small caps) which has lead to many English-speaking Christians interpreting the commandment as you should never say God or the Lord in reference to Bible God except in reverence… And I’m pretty sure that’s the interpretation my Baptist Church Pianist mother lived by when she was alive, and her Church Organist best friend as well.
Though, speaking of my late mother’s best friend, she had a very colorful expression for whenever me and my niblings would misbehave as kids, often threatening to rip our arms off and beat us with the bloody end… Keep in mine, my parents and their friends were of a generation when corporal punishment was not only normal, but pretty much expected when it came to disciplining children.
1 Like
My favorite word trivia is that the word “escalate” is derived from the (then) brand name Escalator and not the other way around. The first time I read that it seemed completely fake and I had to look it up on m-w.com to verify
4 Likes
So “de-escalate” is to go down an escalator and “re-de-escalate” is when a slinky goes down an up-escalator.
2 Likes
I have no explanation for the missing article in “set foot”, but there is a similar expression in German: “Hand anlegen” (literally “put hand on something”, figuratively: “help, pitch in”). It also includes a body part and curiously also has no article. And like “set foot” in English it’s the only expression in German I can think of that works this way.
2 Likes
Since “set sail” comes from the actual act of setting the sails of a boat or ship in the position necessary to begin a journey, then “set foot” could be seen as the corresponding phrase to describe a trip by foot.
It could also be seen as short for “set out by foot” as in “set out by this method of travel.”
1 Like
Maybe this fits into the same category: “Take advice”.
Articles are a, an, and the, correct?
Because I’m scratching my head over how you would even add an article to these phrases and why y’all are scratching your head over an absence of an article.
So, what’s the oddity here that I’m so used to I don’t even realize its an oddity?
1 Like
“Set sail” is a good one! “Weigh anchor” too, I suppose. “Take wing!”
Although I’ve never seen “set foot” used in reference to starting a journey. It means having been present in a place at some point. Actually, we should be talking about the phrase “set foot in”, since “set foot” doesn’t occur alone, does it?
Normally, if a singular noun appears as the object in a sentence, it will either be a mass noun, like “air”, or it will be preceded by an article or possessive (the, a, your, and so on). Of course, plenty of nouns exist as both mass nouns and count nouns (you can “drink beer” and “buy beer”, but also refer to “a beer”—you wouldn’t talk about “an air” though). But “foot” is not a mass noun as far as I can think of. So how come it gets to be the object in “set foot”, without an article? That is, why don’t we have to say, “I never set a foot in there”? We wouldn’t say, “I didn’t lay finger on him”.
This is actually a mass noun, so not quite the same. You wouldn’t expect an article here, because “advice” can’t take an indefinite article at all.
2 Likes
What about “give ear to”?
I would also mention “lay eyes on,” which doesn’t necessarily need an article because it’s plural, but there’s an omitted/implied possessive that arguably fulfills the role of the article, which I feel is also what’s happening with “set foot” and “give ear.”
1 Like
I think this kind of vague use of language, omitting the article or the subject, is actually common in nautical language: “unload cargo”, “make fast”, “abandon ship”, “above deck”.
1 Like
Why not? Advices, the advice, an advice, it’s all possible.
Because that’s actually not English.