{"id":6944,"date":"2025-06-03T03:02:35","date_gmt":"2025-06-03T03:02:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/?p=6944"},"modified":"2025-06-03T03:05:17","modified_gmt":"2025-06-03T03:05:17","slug":"word-of-the-day-disputatious","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/2025\/06\/03\/word-of-the-day-disputatious\/","title":{"rendered":"Word of the Day: Disputatious"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Today\u2019s word of the day, thanks to Words Coach (https:\/\/www.wordscoach.com\/dictionary<\/a>), is disputatious<\/em>. Disputatious is an adjective that means \u201cinclined to dispute\u201d or \u201cmarked by disputation\u201d or \u201cprovoking debate\u201d (https:\/\/www.merriam-webster.com\/dictionary\/disputatious<\/a>). M-W goes on to say this: \u201cDisputatious<\/em> is another lengthy adjective applied to people who like to start arguments or find something to disagree about, and it can be used to characterize situations and issues as well. For example, court trials are disputatious; that is, they are marked by the action of disputing<\/a>. And an issue or matter is disputatious if it provokes controversy. However, if a matter, such as an assertion made by someone, is open to question rather than downright controversial, it\u2019s merely disputable. In any case, there\u2019s no arguing that disputatious<\/em>, dispute<\/em>, and disputable<\/em> have diverged somewhat in meaning from their Latin source: the verb disputare<\/em> means simply \u2018to discuss\u2019\u201d (ibid.).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The pronunciation is \/ \u02ccd\u026as py\u028a\u02c8te\u026a \u0283\u0259s \/ (https:\/\/www.dictionary.com\/browse\/disputatious<\/a>), with the emphasis on the third syllable. And notice that the second syllable is not u<\/em> but y\u028a<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Etymonline.com says that it appears in English in the \u201c1650s; see disputation<\/strong><\/a> + -ous<\/strong><\/a>. Related: Disputatiously<\/em>. In the sense \u2018inclined to disputation,\u2019 earlier words were disputative <\/em>(1570s), disputeful <\/em>(1630s); Shakespeare used disputable <\/em>(c. 1600)\u201d (https:\/\/www.etymonline.com\/search?q=disputatious<\/a>). And for the root word disputation<\/em>, the website says that it is from \u201cfrom Old French desputasion<\/em> and directly from Latin disputationem<\/em> (nominative disputatio<\/em>), noun of action from past-participle stem of disputare<\/em> \u2018weigh, examine, discuss, argue, explain\u2019\u201d (https:\/\/www.etymonline.com\/word\/disputation<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the root word of that, dispute<\/em>, appeared \u201cc. 1300, \u2018engage in argumentation or discussion,\u2019 from Old French disputer<\/em> (12c.) \u2018dispute<\/em>, fight over, contend for, discuss\u2019 and directly from Latin disputare<\/em> \u2018weigh, examine, discuss, argue, explain,\u2019 from dis-<\/em> \u2018separately, apart\u2019 (see dis-<\/strong><\/a>) + putare<\/em> \u2018to count, consider,\u2019 originally \u2018to prune, make clean, clear up\u2019 (from PIE root *pau-<\/strong><\/a> (2) \u2018to cut, strike, stamp\u2019).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Latin word was used in Vulgate in sense of \u2018to argue, contend with words.\u2019 In English, transitive sense of \u2018argue against, attempt to disprove, deny\u2019 is from 1510s\u201d (https:\/\/www.etymonline.com\/search?q=dispute<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On this date in 1140, according to On This Day, \u201cFrench scholar Peter Abelard is found guilty of heresy\u201d (https:\/\/www.onthisday.com\/events\/june\/3<\/a>). Not to be disputatious, but that might be misleading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Peter Abelard, nee \u201c\u2019Pierre le Pallet\u2019, was born c.\u20091079 in Le Pallet,\u201d France (https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Peter_Abelard<\/a>). Though his father was a knight and a minor noble, he encouraged his son to study the liberal arts. So he became a teacher and a philosopher. He changed his surname to \u2018Abelard\u2019, sometimes written \u2018Abailard\u2019 or \u2018Abaelardus\u2019\u201d (ibid.). Quick note: spelling was not as a big thing in the Middle Ages as it is today; we have six extant signatures by William Shakespeare, but there are five different spellings (though perhaps one or two are abbreviations).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHe first studied in the Loire area, where the nominalist Roscellinus of Compi\u00e8gne, who had been accused of heresy by Anselm, was his teacher during this period\u201d (ibid.). Around 1100, he moved to Paris and studied at the Notre Dame cathedral under William of Champeaux. But Abelard soon fell out with both Roscellinus and William over questions of philosophy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After some personal problems which I\u2019ll come back to, Abelard moved to a monastery, but he was soon teaching and studying again: \u201cUsing his studies of the Bible and \u2014 in his view \u2014 inconsistent writings of the leaders of the church as his basis, he wrote Sic et Non<\/a><\/em> (Yes and No<\/em>)\u201d (ibid.) and then published some lectures on theology called Theologia Summi Boni <\/em>(Theology of the Supreme Good<\/em>). Apparently Abelard coined the term theology<\/em>. But not everyone loved his work:  \u201cAlberich of Reims<\/a> and Lotulf of Lombardy, instigated proceedings against Abelard, charging him with the heresy of Sabellius<\/a> in a provincial synod<\/a> held at Soissons<\/a> in 1121\u201d (ibid.). He was fairly quickly found guilty and had to publicly burn Theologia Summi Boni<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abelard was required to live at the Abbey of St. Denis, but he wasn\u2019t happy there. In fact, he got on the monks\u2019 nerves by arguing with them about all kinds of things. H was finally allowed to leave St. Denis, and he went off by himself, building a cabin for himself. But his students soon discovered where he was, and they flocked to him. So he built a more substantial building that he called the Oracle of the Paraclete. This pattern of behavior occurred again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1136, he was teaching again when \u201cWilliam of St Thierry \u2026 discovered what he considered to be heresies in some of Abelard’s teaching\u201d (ibid.). These accusations were sent on to higher ups in the church, including Bernard of Clairvaux. \u201cAmid pressure from Bernard, Abelard challenged Bernard either to withdraw his accusations, or to make them publicly at the important church council at Sens planned for 2 June 1141. In so doing, Abelard put himself into the position of the wronged party and forced Bernard to defend himself from the accusation of slander. Bernard avoided this trap, however: on the eve of the council, he called a private meeting of the assembled bishops and persuaded them to condemn, one by one, each of the heretical propositions he attributed to Abelard. When Abelard appeared at the council the next day, he was presented with a list of condemned propositions imputed to him.\u201d So when On This Day says he was \u201cfound guilty of heresy,\u201d it\u2019s not like there was actually a trial. Furthermore, after his death, the excommunication was lifted, implying that perhaps the heresies were not really heresies after all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The personal problems I mentioned above had to do with a woman: \u201cH\u00e9lo\u00efse d’Argenteuil lived within the precincts of Notre-Dame, under the care of her uncle, the secular canon Fulbert. She was famous as the most well-educated and intelligent woman in Paris, renowned for her knowledge of classical letters, including not only Latin but also Greek and Hebrew\u201d (ibid.). They met and fell in love, and she got pregnant. He called it a seduction, but her writings make clear that the feelings were mutual. They eventually married, but they lived most of their adult lives apart, mostly in abbeys. But at one point her uncle Fulbert hired a group of men to punish Abelard for seducing his niece\u2014and Abelard was castrated. \u201cIn legal retribution for this vigilante attack, members of the band were punished, and Fulbert, scorned by the public, took temporary leave of his canon duties\u201d (ibid.).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alexander Pope, the great poet of the Eighteenth Century, known for his satires (\u201cThe Rape of the Lock\u201d et al.) and poetic essays (\u201cThe Essay on Criticism,\u201d \u201cThe Essay on Man,\u201d et al.) composed what is likely his most Romantic poem, \u201cEloisa to Abelard,\u201d an epistolary poem (so it reads like a letter written by Heloise to Abelard) on these two lovers. Not only is the poem full of feeling, a trait not normally associated with the Neoclassical age of poetry in England, but it is even a bit self-referential. It closes with this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And sure, if fate some future bard shall join<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In sad similitude of griefs to mine,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Condemn’d whole years in absence to deplore,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And image charms he must behold no more;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such if there be, who loves so long, so well;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let him our sad, our tender story tell;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The well-sung woes will soothe my pensive ghost;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He best can paint ’em, who shall feel ’em most.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pope was, of course, that \u201cfuture bard.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then again, I have read some criticism on the poem that tries to deny its Romantic qualities, but those authors were just being disputatious. Today\u2019s image is of Eloisa to Abelard. Illustration for Golden Book of Famous Women<\/em> (Hodder and Stoughton, c 1910), created by Eleanor Fortescue Brickdale (https:\/\/www.lookandlearn.com\/history-images\/N842495\/Eloisa-and-Abelard-Alexander-Pope-Eloisa-to-Abelard<\/a>).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Today\u2019s word of the day, thanks to Words Coach (https:\/\/www.wordscoach.com\/dictionary), is disputatious. Disputatious is an adjective that means \u201cinclined to dispute\u201d or \u201cmarked by disputation\u201d or \u201cprovoking debate\u201d (https:\/\/www.merriam-webster.com\/dictionary\/disputatious). M-W […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":6945,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[52],"tags":[778,238,777,395,284],"class_list":["post-6944","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-word-of-the-day","tag-abelard","tag-dictionary","tag-disputatious","tag-etymology","tag-linguistics","clearfix"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6944","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6944"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6944\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6946,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6944\/revisions\/6946"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6945"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6944"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6944"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.freedomshillprimer.com\/institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6944"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}