Some time last year I learned that rue is a plant—or that "rue" names a plant, let's say. It's a bitter herb, used in the making of bitters both non and potable. A relative of the plant is used in Angostura bitters, for instance. Instantly the more common verb, words like "rueful", Housman's poem, &c., became altogether more portentous and unfamiliar. It really had a strong effect on me.
But it turns out the words are actually unrelated. "Rue" the plant comes from Greek ; "rue" the sorrowful feeling from Old English "hréow". What a disappointment.
In Ophelia's mad monologue, "There's rue, for remembrance" is a deliberate pun, I think. Quote perhaps not exact.
"hreow"? Who knew the Old Angles were cats?
Posted by: Matt Weiner | July 14, 2005 at 10:05 AM
In fact one of the entries for the sorrowful "rue" in the OED is "With punning allusion to RUE n.1".
Posted by: ben wolfson | July 14, 2005 at 10:11 AM
both non and potable
"both potable and non," I should think.
Matt:
"...there's rue for you, and here's some for me; we may call it herb of grace o'Sundays; O, you must wear your rue with a difference."
Rue, regret, is the one herb she plans to take. Rue is also an abortifacient.
Posted by: Michael | July 14, 2005 at 11:29 AM
"both potable and non," I should think.
That's because you are a lackluster prose stylist and I am the next Thomas Browne.
Posted by: ben wolfson | July 14, 2005 at 11:37 AM
Thomas Browne. I worked with the guy who maintains that site one summer when I was writing shell scripts for the Journal of Chemical Physics.
Posted by: ben wolfson | July 14, 2005 at 11:38 AM
it's because if you put "portable" first, you understand the "non" when it comes, but the reverse is not true.
Posted by: Michael | July 14, 2005 at 11:54 AM
Yes. I understand. But the sheer momentum of my writing carries the reader through his or her moment of wonderment at the bare "non" right through the "potable" (and said reader would continue to career wildly were it not for the all-stopping power of the period) at which point the "non" becomes retrospectively comprehensible; and more than that, a vital realization is effected, videlicet, by putting the "non" first, I advert the attentive reader to the understanding that it is only because of the nonpotable that the potable is noteworthy.
Posted by: ben wolfson | July 14, 2005 at 11:59 AM
uh huh.
Posted by: Michael | July 14, 2005 at 12:14 PM
Your prose style has elements both un and readable.
Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | July 14, 2005 at 12:56 PM
I think your neologistic usage is inadvertentisable.
Posted by: dave zacuto | July 14, 2005 at 01:21 PM
Watch it, dave. I know where you live, more or less.
Posted by: ben wolfson | July 15, 2005 at 07:01 AM