One of Tizzy’s recent comments reminded me of this article from many years back concerning the Society For Pedants, or Society for the Promotion of Pedantry. Long has it been an inspiration to me. The bulk of it is reprinted – or perhaps redisplayed – below, but there are other gems in the full article.
Before the main debate could begin, the Chairman – or Chair – informed us that there were a number of outstanding matters to clear up, before being overruled by a majority of members who said that, on the contrary, there was a number of outstanding matters to clear up. “Next week’s cinema outing is to The Golden Bowl, the adaptation of Henry James’s famous novel,” he said. “This will be followed by a short meeting in which you will be able to vote for a motion declaring it not as good as the original, followed by an opportunity to list its key mistakes and anachronisms.”
“On a point of order, Mr Chairman.” A tall woman at the back had raised her hand. “On a point of order, shouldn’t that be not ‘Henry James’s famous novel’ but ‘Henry James’ famous novel’?”
“Strictly speaking, that’s not a point of order,” replied the Chairman, “It’s a point of information.”
“In this day and age,” began a man in a beige cardigan. At the sound of this explosive phrase everyone perked up. “In this day and age, I wonder if one is able to strictly call The Golden Bowl a famous novel at all?”
A cry of horror erupted in the hall. “I must ask the gentleman in the beige cardigan to leave the hall,” said the Chairman. “We cannot sanction a split infinitive.”
“I refute your suggestion that this is a cardigan,” retorted the offending gentleman. “A cardigan buttons, or, if you will, unbuttons, to the waist. This garment buttons only a quarter of the way down, to just above the chest. So it is not a cardigan in the strict sense of the word, but a jersey, even though that aforementioned island is not, strictly speaking, its country of origin.”
There followed a heated discussion over the speaker’s use of the word refute: some thought he meant deny, while others believed he would have been better off employing – or at least using – confute.
“On a point of information, Chairman.” The speaker was a woman with a bun in her hair, by which I mean not a woman with a small, sweetened bread roll or cake (often with dried fruit) in her hair, but a woman whose hair was drawn into a tight coil at the back of her head. “On a point of information, I must point out that, in the original novel, Frankenstein was not, as is commonly supposed, the monster, but rather the inventor of that monster.”
A murmur of approval swept – metaphorically – around the room. We pedants always appreciate being reminded of the F-point, even if it hasn’t been raised. “May I also add,” continued the woman with the bun, “that, contrary to popular misconception, King Canute was only too well aware that he could not hold back the tide.”