Dear Dr. Ink:
Was Councilman Davis [of New York City] murdered or assassinated?
And if an eyewitness said he “dived” for cover, should the reference (when not in direct quotes) say he “dove” for cover?
Thank you,
Julia Kocich
Astoria, NY
Answer:
The word “murder” emphasizes the illegal nature of a killing, while “assassinate” emphasizes the celebrity or political nature of the person who is killed. Both words may apply in the Davis case.
The word “assassinate” has a wonderful history. Assassins, according to the American Heritage Dictionary (AHD), were once members of “a secret order of Moslem fanatics who terrorized and killed Christian Crusaders.” Over time the word came to apply to anyone who killed a prominent person for ideological reasons.
The word comes to us through the medieval Latin “assassinus,” from the Arabic hashshashin, the plural for “a hashish addict.”
Hey, those drugs can kill ya, man.
As for “dove” and “dived,” the latter is bit more formal, but Doc thinks either is acceptable in most cases.
Dear Dr. Ink:
After unsuccessfully searching Webster’s for an accurate definition of “disenfranchised,” I come to you. In all my criminal justice courses (my minor in college) it was taught that “disenfranchised” ONLY meant someone without the right to vote, usually taken away due to commission of a felony.
However, I constantly see this word used as a synonym for poor, black, homeless (most common in my experience), jobless, illiterate, helpless, downtrodden, mistreated and a myriad of other conditions. It seems to be accompanied by the assumption that the person is in whatever condition through no fault of their own. Am I crazy, or is this wrong?
Please help. This is making me bonkers.
Respectfully,
Elizabeth A. Odell
Baltimore Guide
Answer:
Doc may need a new dictionary. His old AHD does not even record “disenfranchise,” preferring “disfranchise.” A more serious omission may be a failure to define “bonkers.”
Dr. Ink agrees with the general thrust of this correspondent. The narrower meaning is that one gets kicked out of the voting club, that is, you lose your franchise as a citizen, especially the right to vote.
The word has expanded to include the loss of opportunity or privilege that a productive community would hope to extend to all citizens. Dr. Ink heard an African-American judge in Florida citing the shocking statistic that although African-Americans make up about 12 percent of the population, they make up about 50 percent of the prison population.
Convicted felons lose their right to vote. They are literally disenfranchised. There are efforts, which the Doc supports, to “re-enfranchise” felons after they do their time as a path back toward constructive citizenship.
Dear Dr. Ink:
How about a segue from “alleged victim” to a more readily abused characterization these days — “hero.”
I keep reading about Jessica Lynch and her hero’s welcome home — “But she became a national hero after media reports quoted unnamed U.S. officials as saying she fought fiercely before being captured.”
Am I mistaken that these early reports have been pretty thoroughly debunked?
Is this a post 9/11 thing — to label victims as heroes?
Mark Worden
Answer:
Just a few weeks after 9/11, Dr. Ink suggested, impolitely, that he was sniffing a bit too much wind under American wings. It was not meant, then or now, to denigrate the courageous acts of some police officers, fire fighters, or soldiers.
The problem is inflation. When the word is used more often, and more promiscuously, it loses value.
And Dr. Ink has come to hate those television interviews that include the question “What does it feel like to be a hero?”
The person always looks embarrassed by the question and answers with predictable humility: “I’m no hero, Katie, I was just doin’ my job.”
Even if the humility is false, Doc find more wisdom in the answer than in the question.
[ Dived? Dove? Disenfranchised? Disfranchised? Hero? Job-Doer? What do you think? ]
