• Demonize/Demonise

    From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Nov 26 10:49:28 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    In another forum there has been some discussion of the word
    "demonize".

    I'd be grateful if anyone with access to the OED could give a summmary
    of how it has historically been used in English.

    Here's an excerpt from the other discussion:

    "In connection with the Bible, the term "demonized" represents the
    original Greek ???????????? (daimonizomai), which refers to
    being -- to one degree or another -- under the power/attack of a
    demon.

    It's the verb that is often translated "demon-possessed," i.e., having
    a demon inside you, as in the case of the man with the legion of
    demons in him that Jesus cast out into the pigs.-a What can't be done
    -- on the basis of the Greek -- is to use "demonized" to mean "to
    regard or treat someone as if he were especially evil, like a demon."
    But that's the sense the word seems to have today, e.g., when people
    talk about "demonizing" someone."
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Ross Clark@benlizro@ihug.co.nz to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Nov 26 22:14:25 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 26/11/2025 9:49 p.m., Steve Hayes wrote:
    In another forum there has been some discussion of the word
    "demonize".

    I'd be grateful if anyone with access to the OED could give a summmary
    of how it has historically been used in English.

    Here's an excerpt from the other discussion:

    "In connection with the Bible, the term "demonized" represents the
    original Greek ???????????? (daimonizomai), which refers to
    being -- to one degree or another -- under the power/attack of a
    demon.

    It's the verb that is often translated "demon-possessed," i.e., having
    a demon inside you, as in the case of the man with the legion of
    demons in him that Jesus cast out into the pigs.-a What can't be done
    -- on the basis of the Greek -- is to use "demonized" to mean "to
    regard or treat someone as if he were especially evil, like a demon."
    But that's the sense the word seems to have today, e.g., when people
    talk about "demonizing" someone."



    OED cites Hellenistic Greek +|+#+|++++++b+++|+|-a+++#+| [daimon|!zesthai] to be
    possessed by a demon (already in ancient Greek in sense rCyto be deifiedrCO).

    Not a very old word in English; no attestations before the 18th century.
    OED senses (not in the order they give them):

    3. (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal). Usually passive. 1800-

    2. To render demonic in character; to turn (a person) into a demon; to
    make evil; to corrupt. 1775-

    1a. To represent as a malevolent supernatural being. 1743-

    1b. To portray (a person or thing) as wicked and threatening, (now) esp.
    in an inaccurate or misrepresentative way. (Now the usual sense.) 1817-


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Nov 28 04:16:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 22:14:25 +1300, Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz>
    wrote:

    OED cites Hellenistic Greek ????????????? [daimon|!zesthai] to be
    possessed by a demon (already in ancient Greek in sense rCyto be deifiedrCO).

    Not a very old word in English; no attestations before the 18th century.
    OED senses (not in the order they give them):

    3. (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal). Usually passive. 1800-

    2. To render demonic in character; to turn (a person) into a demon; to
    make evil; to corrupt. 1775-

    1a. To represent as a malevolent supernatural being. 1743-

    1b. To portray (a person or thing) as wicked and threatening, (now) esp.
    in an inaccurate or misrepresentative way. (Now the usual sense.) 1817-

    Thanks very much. So it appears that it has been used in English in a
    sense similar to the original Greek.
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Anton Shepelev@anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Tue Dec 2 13:50:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.
    --
    () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
    /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From occam@occam@nowhere.nix to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Tue Dec 2 14:00:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 02/12/2025 11:50, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.


    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon? I've often heard it used with
    evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a demon.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bertel Lund Hansen@rundtosset@lundhansen.dk to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Tue Dec 2 14:30:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Den 02.12.2025 kl. 14.00 skrev occam:

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.


    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work.

    What about "monise" then?
    --
    Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Tue Dec 2 20:03:27 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:

    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.

    No.
    To exorcise presumes that there really is a demon there.
    To demonise meas to -portray- as wicked, [my emphasis]
    so it presumes that there is no demon there,

    Jan

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Sam Plusnet@not@home.com to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Tue Dec 2 19:12:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 02/12/2025 10:50, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.

    Not simply the opposite, an exclusive OR.
    --
    Sam Plusnet
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Dec 3 03:57:09 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 14:00:47 +0100, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

    On 02/12/2025 11:50, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.


    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is the use of to >'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon? I've often heard it used with
    evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Dec 3 14:59:37 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

    On 02/12/2025 11:50, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.


    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon? I've often heard it used with
    evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a demon.

    Anything that can take possession of a human being,
    so 'forces of evil' generally, I think.
    The church merely adapted rituals that go back
    to very ancient times.
    Some protestant sects were wiser,
    but others saw a business opportunity.
    AFAIK some still do.
    The RCC is trying to get rid of excorcism, again AFAIK.
    From what I read an RCC priest is no longer allowed to.
    It needs to be supervised by a bisshop,

    Jan

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From richard@richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Dec 3 14:49:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    -- Richard
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From lar3ryca@larry@invalid.ca to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Wed Dec 3 22:59:15 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 2025-12-03 05:15, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Steve Hayes to occam:

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is
    the use of to evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a
    demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?

    We modern folks have lost all the important nuances and niceties
    of /demon/, /force/, /entity/, /spitit/, /succubus/, /incubus/,
    and the rest of the jolly company.

    As far as I'm concerned, they all have the same nuance. They are all
    every bit a real as leprechauns, fairies, and Trump's honesty.
    --
    Unix is user friendly. It's just very particular who its friends are.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 08:20:32 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 14:15:06 +0300, Anton Shepelev
    <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

    Steve Hayes to occam:

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is
    the use of to evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a
    demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?

    We modern folks have lost all the important nuances and niceties
    of /demon/, /force/, /entity/, /spitit/, /succubus/, /incubus/,
    and the rest of the jolly company.

    I offer a couple of quotes, which may or may not help to clarify:

    Antichrist.
    Source: Wink 1986:57.
    Thou talk'st of Antichrist and Beast, and dost not see (If
    thou be not in God) that they are both in thee.

    Angelus Silesius, _The Cherubic Wanderer_, trans. Willard R.
    Trask (New York, Pantheon Books, 1953)

    Quoted in Wink 1986:57

    Demonic attacks.
    Source: Stewart 1991:97.
    On Naxos people believed that exotika attacked virtuous
    people who had faith, especially priests and monks. They do
    not often appear nowadays because people perform all sorts of
    horrible acts. They have gone to the Devil - there is no need
    for the devil to come to them.

    Sources:

    Wink, Walter. 1986. Unmasking the powers: the invisible forces
    that determine human existence. Philadelphia:
    Fortress.
    ISBN: 0-8006-1902-1
    Dewey: 235 WINK

    Stewart, Charles. 1991. Demons and the devil: moral imagination
    in modern Greek culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
    University Press.
    ISBN: 0-691-02848-6
    Dewey: 306.691 216 094 99
    The exotika - neraida, imps and demons etc in
    modern Greece are not mere survivals of
    pre-Christian Greek religion and culture, but
    have been profoundly transformed by the
    Orthodox Christian faith. Some interesting
    parallels between inculturation in Orthodoxy
    and the African independent churches,
    Ethiopian Church etc.
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 08:28:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 22:59:15 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-03 05:15, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Steve Hayes to occam:

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is
    the use of to evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a
    demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?

    We modern folks have lost all the important nuances and niceties
    of /demon/, /force/, /entity/, /spitit/, /succubus/, /incubus/,
    and the rest of the jolly company.

    As far as I'm concerned, they all have the same nuance. They are all
    every bit a real as leprechauns, fairies, and Trump's honesty.

    Some might say that Trump himself is demonised.

    Some might go further and say that his whole administration is
    demonic.

    And some might go further still and say that the fact that Trump was
    elected a second time shows that the whole of the USA is demonised,
    that the majority of its people are so much under the influence of a
    demonic power theat they cannot distinguish good from evil, and the
    whole country needs to be exorcised.

    Hint: Fugs Pentagon
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Hayes@hayesstw@telkomsa.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 08:32:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 14:49:42 -0000 (UTC), richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
    (Richard Tobin) wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    Ontological question: Do Orks exist?

    What do I know I'm just a bloke's answer: I don't care whether they
    exist or not. What I do know is that they are joining ICE in large
    numbers.
    --
    Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
    Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
    Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
    E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From occam@occam@nowhere.nix to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 09:04:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 04/12/2025 07:28, Steve Hayes wrote:
    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 22:59:15 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-03 05:15, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Steve Hayes to occam:

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is
    the use of to evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a
    demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?

    We modern folks have lost all the important nuances and niceties
    of /demon/, /force/, /entity/, /spitit/, /succubus/, /incubus/,
    and the rest of the jolly company.

    As far as I'm concerned, they all have the same nuance. They are all
    every bit a real as leprechauns, fairies, and Trump's honesty.

    Some might say that Trump himself is demonised.


    Mr. Hayes, I demand that you apologise immediately for that last
    statement.

    You have to issue an unconditional apology to all demons in the Universe
    for associating them with Trump. No self-respecting demon would occupy
    that fat orange cunt's body and live to tell the tale.

    (FYI -Demons serve evil. Trump is the source. Make no mistake.)



    Some might go further and say that his whole administration is
    demonic.

    Yes, since they serve Trump.


    And some might go further still and say that the fact that Trump was
    elected a second time shows that the whole of the USA is demonised,
    that the majority of its people are so much under the influence of a
    demonic power theat they cannot distinguish good from evil, and the
    whole country needs to be exorcised.

    Hint: Fugs Pentagon



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From occam@occam@nowhere.nix to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 09:09:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 03/12/2025 15:49, Richard Tobin wrote:
    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.


    I think you are thinking of orcorising. (Not to be confused with
    exorcising.)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From occam@occam@nowhere.nix to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 09:15:22 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 04/12/2025 07:20, Steve Hayes wrote:
    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 14:15:06 +0300, Anton Shepelev
    <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

    Steve Hayes to occam:

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work. Is
    the use of to evil forces, spirits - not necessarily with a
    demon.

    What do you see as the distinction between them?

    We modern folks have lost all the important nuances and niceties
    of /demon/, /force/, /entity/, /spitit/, /succubus/, /incubus/,
    and the rest of the jolly company.

    I offer a couple of quotes, which may or may not help to clarify:

    Antichrist.
    Source: Wink 1986:57.
    Thou talk'st of Antichrist and Beast, and dost not see (If
    thou be not in God) that they are both in thee.


    Quoted in Wink 1986:57


    That sounded like a Bible reference, so I rushed to The Word, my bible
    research tool. I'm none the wiser <wink, wink>.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 12:55:15 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Jan



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kerr-Mudd, John@admin@127.0.0.1 to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 12:20:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 01:03:45 +0300
    Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

    Bertel Lund Hansen:
    occam:
    Anton Shepelev:

    The opposite of `exorcise'.

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work.

    What about "monise" then?

    It is OK by me, as long as `demonstrate' means to extinguish
    monsters.

    Well, that's no good; a demonstrata is required in any tale of
    evil geology.
    --
    Bah, and indeed, Humbug
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kerr-Mudd, John@admin@127.0.0.1 to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 12:23:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.
    --
    Bah, and indeed, Humbug
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kerr-Mudd, John@admin@127.0.0.1 to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Thu Dec 4 12:29:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 19:12:39 +0000
    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 02/12/2025 10:50, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Ross Clark

    (Of a demon) to possess (a person or animal).
    Usually passive. 1800-

    The opposite of `exorcise'.

    Not simply the opposite, an exclusive OR.


    Not yr standard seizure, then.
    --
    Bah, and indeed, Humbug
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Anton Shepelev@anton.txt@gmail.moc to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 01:33:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Kerr-Mudd, John:

    Well, that's no good; a demonstrata is required in any tale of
    evil geology.

    What's a demonstratum?
    --
    () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
    /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Heathfield@rjh@cpax.org.uk to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 01:04:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 04/12/2025 22:33, Anton Shepelev wrote:
    Kerr-Mudd, John:

    Well, that's no good; a demonstrata is required in any tale of
    evil geology.

    What's a demonstratum?

    An entire archaeological layer of compressed imps.
    --
    Richard Heathfield
    Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
    Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 10:36:50 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 01:03:45 +0300
    Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

    Bertel Lund Hansen:
    occam:
    Anton Shepelev:

    The opposite of `exorcise'.

    Well, the alternative - to de-demonise would not work.

    What about "monise" then?

    It is OK by me, as long as `demonstrate' means to extinguish
    monsters.

    Well, that's no good; a demonstrata is required in any tale of
    evil geology.

    You've been boning up on your Ethica?

    Jan

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Anton Shepelev@anton.txt@gmail.moc to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 12:57:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Richard Heathfield to Anton Shepelev:

    What's a demonstratum?

    An entire archaeological layer of compressed imps.

    Thanks, I thought it was a one-man picket, an atomic
    demonstration. On the other hand, an atomic demonstration may
    mean something else.
    --
    () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
    /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From occam@occam@nowhere.nix to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 12:17:34 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Phil@phil@anonymous.invalid to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 12:40:03 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 05/12/2025 11:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.


    Like Daniel Dukes (who went for a swim in the orca tank), you mean?
    Though he may have drowned first:

    "DukesrCO autopsy report, posted here by Tim Zimmermann, offers a glimpse
    into what Dukes endured during his time with Tilikum. His black nylon
    swimming trunks were noted to have rCLthe crotch and inner leg seams torn open.rCY Tili had avulsed [to separate, cut, or tear off by avulsion]
    DukesrCO pubic area."

    <https://www.dolphinproject.org/blog/trio-of-deaths-sheriffs-report-on-the-death-of-daniel-dukes/>
    --
    Phil B

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From lar3ryca@larry@invalid.ca to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Fri Dec 5 13:00:44 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.
    --
    Corduroy pillows are back in style? They're making headlines.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Qruqs@qruqs@no.email.invalid to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 10:23:17 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 08:32:39 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

    Ontological question: Do Orks exist?

    Sure, they live here:
    https://maps.app.goo.gl/YGq1ZY4vS2NygCJp9
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kerr-Mudd, John@admin@127.0.0.1 to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 10:48:48 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 01:33:31 +0300
    Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

    Kerr-Mudd, John:

    Well, that's no good; a demonstrata is required in any tale of
    evil geology.

    What's a demonstratum?


    I'm sure it's been clearly explained:

    Q.E.D.

    Oh sorry, that's a strand. um.
    --
    Bah, and indeed Humbug.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 14:40:49 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    Jan

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Sam Plusnet@not@home.com to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 20:15:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 06/12/2025 10:23, Qruqs wrote:
    On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 08:32:39 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote:

    Ontological question: Do Orks exist?

    Sure, they live here:
    https://maps.app.goo.gl/YGq1ZY4vS2NygCJp9

    Shouldn't that pin be at Skara Brae?
    --
    Sam Plusnet
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Sam Plusnet@not@home.com to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 20:16:25 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.
    --
    Sam Plusnet
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sat Dec 6 21:55:06 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    Jan


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Opinicus@gezgin@spamcop.net.which.is.not.quite.invalid to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sun Dec 7 08:07:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 21:55:06 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder) wrote:

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    There is a superflous space between the second and third words in that sentence.
    --
    Bob
    Thank you for using Kanyak's Editing Service. Insert coin [] here.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sun Dec 7 11:14:13 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Opinicus <gezgin@spamcop.net.which.is.not.quite.invalid> wrote:

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 21:55:06 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder) wrote:

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    There is a superflous space between the second and third words in that sentence.

    Ah! You volunteer for a test, I presume?

    Jan
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Sam Plusnet@not@home.com to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Sun Dec 7 21:09:17 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 07/12/2025 05:07, Opinicus wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 21:55:06 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder) wrote:

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    There is a superflous space between the second and third words in that sentence.


    But is it still true if one has been orchestrated?
    --
    Sam Plusnet
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Mon Dec 8 10:41:34 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 07/12/2025 05:07, Opinicus wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 21:55:06 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder) wrote:

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>, >>>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon? >>>>>>>>>
    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs. >>>>>>>>
    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and >>>>> crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    There is a superflous space between the second and third words in that sentence.


    But is it still true if one has been orchestrated?

    Sorry, I still hesitrate about answering that one,

    Jan
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris Elvidge@chris@internal.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Mon Dec 8 14:26:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 06/12/2025 at 20:16, Sam Plusnet wrote:
    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>,
    J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon?

    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs.

    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and
    crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.


    Wasn't there a similar question in Quick Draw McGraw - how fast can you
    draw a gun?
    --
    Chris Elvidge, England
    GOLDFISH DON'T BOUNCE
    Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 9F14

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris Elvidge@chris@internal.net to alt.usage.english,alt.english.usage on Mon Dec 8 14:28:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.english.usage

    On 07/12/2025 at 21:09, Sam Plusnet wrote:
    On 07/12/2025 05:07, Opinicus wrote:
    On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 21:55:06 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder) wrote:

    Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

    On 06/12/2025 13:40, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

    On 2025-12-05 05:17, occam wrote:
    On 04/12/2025 13:23, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
    On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 12:55:15 +0100
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

    Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    In article <1rmri1l.14w948fc3o68N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>, >>>>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <jjlxa32@xs4all.nl> wrote:

    Is the use of to 'exorcise' entirely linked with a demon? >>>>>>>>>>
    'forces of evil' generally, I think.

    Orcs, for example.

    That may be a good counterexample.
    Evil no doubt, but I'm not aware of Orcs taking possession
    of humans the way demons do.
    They are just convenient sword-fodder in fantasy,
    to be exterminated without mercy, just because they are orcs. >>>>>>>>>
    Tolkien seems to have like 'orc' because the word 'orc'
    has such a nice nasty sound to it,

    Being orchestrated always had a worrying tone to it.


    Not as worrying as being orccastrated.

    Oh thanks I think every male in here tightened their sphincters and >>>>>> crossed their legs.

    Real men draw their swords,

    A quick sketch really isn't the answer to this problem.

    'The pen is mightier than the sword',

    There is a superflous space between the second and third words in that
    sentence.


    But is it still true if one has been orchestrated?


    Or Bobbitted?
    --
    Chris Elvidge, England
    GOLDFISH DON'T BOUNCE
    Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 9F14

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2