May I make a forlorn plea to use "decimation" correctly?
The term---meaning loss of a tenth---comes from Roman military practice two-millennia-plus ago. A legion (call it 5,000 strong) that broke and ran from combat might be sentenced to undergo decimation. After being deprived of its eagle, the legion's standard, it legionaries would be …
May I make a forlorn plea to use "decimation" correctly?
The term---meaning loss of a tenth---comes from Roman military practice two-millennia-plus ago. A legion (call it 5,000 strong) that broke and ran from combat might be sentenced to undergo decimation. After being deprived of its eagle, the legion's standard, it legionaries would be divided into groups of 10 legionaries. They would draw straws, the loser being killed by the other nine. The survivors would be retained in service and given a chance to earn back their eagle, and their honor. Loss of a tenth is heavy but not disastrous---the legion would still be a viable combat unit.
We have come to use the word as equivalent to wholesale slaughter, completely wiped out, utterly destroyed, annihilated. Since we have so many other words to describe extreme losses, can we please decimation to mean a self-imposed loss something less to total loss.
Thank you. Great information that I did not know. Although I don't use the word "decimated" I see it employed often to mean almost total destruction. Old dog new tricks. Now I can show the lads how smart I am next time somebody uses it in conversation down at the pub!
I've made my grumbling peace with this particular linguistic drift.
However, my secret to keeping lower blood pressure (alas, for this issue alone) is to substitute "devastated" every time I see "decimated" as a matter of cognitive protection.
That's not a bad idea, but it's a purely personal fix. My concern is that one of these I'm going to use the word to mean what it actually means (I write military history) and my readers may misinterpret it. The arc of language is toward simplicity, but I fear the arc of American (it is NOT English according to my English---NOT British---friends) is so sharp it's really aimed for illiteracy. Just saw a very interesting youtube video on the decline of reading in Late Antiquity mirroring the decline of the Roman Empire. Illiteracy breeds ignorance, ignorance breeds passivity (read: stupidity), and passive/stupid people can be led more easily.
May I make a forlorn plea to use "decimation" correctly?
The term---meaning loss of a tenth---comes from Roman military practice two-millennia-plus ago. A legion (call it 5,000 strong) that broke and ran from combat might be sentenced to undergo decimation. After being deprived of its eagle, the legion's standard, it legionaries would be divided into groups of 10 legionaries. They would draw straws, the loser being killed by the other nine. The survivors would be retained in service and given a chance to earn back their eagle, and their honor. Loss of a tenth is heavy but not disastrous---the legion would still be a viable combat unit.
We have come to use the word as equivalent to wholesale slaughter, completely wiped out, utterly destroyed, annihilated. Since we have so many other words to describe extreme losses, can we please decimation to mean a self-imposed loss something less to total loss.
Sorry, pet peeve.
Thank you. Great information that I did not know. Although I don't use the word "decimated" I see it employed often to mean almost total destruction. Old dog new tricks. Now I can show the lads how smart I am next time somebody uses it in conversation down at the pub!
I've made my grumbling peace with this particular linguistic drift.
However, my secret to keeping lower blood pressure (alas, for this issue alone) is to substitute "devastated" every time I see "decimated" as a matter of cognitive protection.
That's not a bad idea, but it's a purely personal fix. My concern is that one of these I'm going to use the word to mean what it actually means (I write military history) and my readers may misinterpret it. The arc of language is toward simplicity, but I fear the arc of American (it is NOT English according to my English---NOT British---friends) is so sharp it's really aimed for illiteracy. Just saw a very interesting youtube video on the decline of reading in Late Antiquity mirroring the decline of the Roman Empire. Illiteracy breeds ignorance, ignorance breeds passivity (read: stupidity), and passive/stupid people can be led more easily.