Word Routes
Exploring the pathways of our lexicon
Torn Limn from Limn
The Baltimore Sun raised a ruckus among its readers by printing a certain four-letter word in a front-page headline on Tuesday. Here is the offending headline:
Opposing votes limn differences in race
Limn (pronounced like "limb") means "trace the shape of," "make a portrait of," or simply "describe." It isn't a word you see every day in newspaper headlines, and that bothered some Baltimoreans.
The headline, for a story about candidates for the position of Baltimore County executive, particularly rankled Carol N. Shaw, who wrote this in a letter to the editor:
I had to keep looking at it again and again. ... I consider myself an educated person. I graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Maryland, College Park some years ago with a degree in international relations/economics. I have never heard of the word "limn." ... To put a word like "limn" in the headline for the lead article on the front page of this newspaper seems to me to be unbelievably arrogant and patronizing.
Though The Sun reported that Shaw was just one of many who complained, the paper printed other letters from readers who disagreed with Shaw's characterization of the word's use as "arrogant and patronizing." Here is Susanne Ogaitis-Jones:
And Clive Graham:I think it's great that The Sun challenged us with vocabulary and provided a good way for me demonstrate a skill to my kids that I talk much about — looking up definitions.
I too was intrigued by the headline, "Opposing votes limn difference in race." But having looked it up and learned the word, I smiled, moved on and was not only grateful to The Sun for giving me a new word but also in admiration for the way that little four-letter word efficiently filled the narrow column space. Keep it up.
John E. McIntyre, a Sun copy editor (and an old friend of the Visual Thesaurus), noted on his blog that limn most frequently shows up in arts coverage, so it might not have been the most familiar term to drop into a front-page political headline. Nonetheless, he rallied to the defense of the word:
Speaking as a headline writer myself, though not the author of this one, I heartily endorse all sorts of short verbs that are neither scatological nor obscene. Speaking as a language maven, I applaud when people consult dictionaries to add another little brick to the wall of their vocabularies. Now that you know what it means, it is yours forever.
But limn — which began as a variant of lumine, from Latin illuminare meaning "to embellish or light up" — has engendered mixed reactions over the years even from literary types. Some writers love using the word: New York Times book critic Michiko Kakutani is such a serial abuser that one lit-blogger called her "The First Lady of Limn." Naysayers have included David Foster Wallace, who mused in one of his notorious footnotes that he might like to use limn if it didn't "end up seeming just off-the-charts pretentious."
Washington Post book critic Michael Dirda leveled what must surely be the most furious objection to limn, in an opinionated note included in the Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus:
This is the phoniest word in the critic's vocabulary, aside from luminous to describe a writer's prose (and usually rather gushy prose at that). People are unsure of limn's pronunciation, uncertain of its actual meaning, and generally pretentious when they use it. Most of the time journalists resort to limn because they want something fancier than describe. Yet while describe slips smoothly by without calling much attention to itself, limn jumps off the page to strut about and show off. It's one of those words that want to be urbane and debonair but are somehow really ugly, pushy, and nouveau riche. But maybe I'm going out on a limb by saying that. So let's just call limn fundamentally, almost viscerally, rebarbative.
I find limn a bit odd outside of artsy contexts, but it doesn't strike me as "fundamentally, almost viscerally, rebarbative" (rebarbative means "serving or tending to repel," if you didn't know). I'm with John McIntyre: let the headline writers have their non-scatological four-letter word, and let newspaper readers run to the dictionary every once in a while.
What do you think of limn? Arrogant, patronizing, pretentious, ugly, or just fine? Let us know in the comments below.


Join the conversation
Comments from our users:
I am grateful for each opportunity to add a word I had not known before to my vocabulary. I knew limn; I know it better now for the fuss. Michael Chabon, in a San Francisco City Arts & Lectures response to why he uses so many unfamiliar words in his writing said—and I paraphrase—that he wants to keep our language vibrant and full. I agree with him. My vote? Limn is just fine.
I'm in technical writing, and I actually subscribe in OUR writing to the idea that we shouldn't be sending our readers to the dictionary. (http://bit.ly/boVXHp) However, the focus of our writing is different than that of a newspaper. Moreover, we know already that a substantial percentage of our audience is reading English as a foreign language. We therefore do our utmost to reduce barriers to comprehending material that even native speakers tend to find slow going under the best of circumstances. Our readers, we figure, have enough problems without having to reach for the dictionary. If we do use vocabulary that our readers don't comprehend, it's certainly not because we're arrogant or patronizing.
The oddest part of Carol N. Shaw's letter to the The Sun, I thought, was her description of trying to find the word "limn":
"... I finally went to the computer and did a spell check. It checked out but I then had to run it through two thesauri to come up with definitions of this word."
Since when does one look up words in thesauruses?
So I'd say it served its purpose well.
From ‘English Literature for Boys and Girls’ published in 1909, a book by Henrietta Elizabeth Marshall (a book in which limner is used)
Now, when I do not know a word, I immediately consult the dictionary; when I know a word and I like it I try to find out in what literary works was used, as it always can be found in a book I did not read, or if I read it gives me pleasure to read again at least the passages that contain the word.
Interesting article, as it sent me to search for literary works using ‘limn’, and in the process I learned technical words too: limnograph [′lim•nə‚graf] (engineering) - A recording made on a limnimeter, where limnimeter [lim′nim•əd•ər] (engineering) is a type of tide gage for measuring lake level variations.
I cannot see how it was possible for Carol N. Shaw to see the word limn “unbelievably arrogant and patronizing” when it was a word, with its different forms (limn, limner), known, once upon a time, even by boys and girls! Apart from this, one should be always grateful for being forced (consult the dictionary) to learn a new beautiful word! But then, one has to love language, as, I suppose, we, all posting on this site, do.
With regard to why it was used, its brevity was probably one of the reasons, but avoiding an obnoxious internal rhyme was probably what clinched it. A short, more accessible headline would've been this one: "Opposing votes trace differences in race." But there's the annoying trace-race rhyme. Words like represent, depict, highlight and present would've been accesible, but not short enough. In comes limn, with its attendant ire.
A "proper" grasp of vocabulary is always tricky. We plod through the vastness of words led by our tastes, and so we are often stunned to see someone not know a word we thought was familiar. Maybe he didn't read the five books we found the word in, but he did read dozens of others from which we haven't culled their own share of unusual words.
Most of my complaints are about non-news (sports, faith, lachrymose human interest) articles that show up on the front page. In my view they are guaranteed to repel corporations, other smart transients, and people like me, who believe the daily newspaper to be an important instrument for literacy, conversation, and citizen participation. There are entire sections appropriated to sports, faith, and tear-inducing life stories, so editors should use them.
The front page is for the construction of intelligent, informed citizenship. "Limn" is powerful in this instance because it appears in a context that requires second thoughts. As usual, it is in the second, contextual thinking that the value appears. Context is the least-valued and most important element of information, and it is always the indicator of thoughtful journalism. Of course, there is the risk that readers will ignore the news and simply discuss elegant prose.
NoblSavaj is a grammatical anarchist. He says, "Any series of gestures, guttural utterances or imagery that communicates the intended message to the intended audience is valid language." Headlines that send people running to the dictionary (or, more likely, on to the next distraction) may not clearly, at least immediately, communicate.
Heavens, one would think that asking people to stretch a little, instead of serving the lowest common denominator, is outside the realm of newspapers.
Now THAT's arrogant! :D
dictionary reaches its final edition at which point some thoughts
will not be possible and those thoughts that are possible can only be expressed in one way. I nominate Carol N. Shaw as the editor of that
longed for the smaller the better book!
I had the meaning, but needed help with the pronunciation, like some others here. I'd always thought of it as being pronounced 'lime'.
'rebarbative'! I loved that. Though I disagreed with the point of view of that writer, I enjoyed the way he made his point with that word.
For anyone interested, there's a great little program on a computer that just requires you to click on a word to get a definition...
And there's VT! Too bad the C.S. had neither! LOL
in any case, what i wrote has little to do with the conflict. the point is: language. the point of which is communication. did limn help or confuse?
did it-- wait for it-- did it communicate. all-in-all, it was probably a disservice to the reader. bury limn in the body of the story. i think the word the Sun was looking for was: define or illustrate. no. not illustrate for a headline. now that i'm trying to second guess them, i can see their difficulties. but surely, not limn.
I'm with David Foster Wallace. Although his carping about pretentiousness would have been a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, if he weren't such a genius.
But mostly this debate leaves me wondering: How could this headline have been written otherwise and better, to convey the same meaning, and in as few characters?
..."the multicolor shimmer above a body of water that lasts for only moments before the sun sets." An indelible image... Now, that's quite a jump into imagination from such a little word.
Bravo to the Sun for headlining it and to Ben Zimmer for illuminating the controversy (or should I say "limning" it?).
Google's Ngram Viewer tells us something about usage in "lots of books"--as in many of the millions they have scanned. If you look up "limn" in American English from 1800 to 2000, you'll see a peak in usage around 1835 [http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/graph?content=limn&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=5&smoothing=3] with it sharply dropping off by 2000. British English is similar but with higher usage and a peak around 1810. Try it with any variation of "English" choices and you'll see that this is a delightfully old-fashioned word.
Most interesting of all, so is "rebarbative"! Check it out; a similar profile. Ngrams may become the next parlour game. (A phrase peaking in the late '50s.)
LIMM is literate.
Some folks are just too full of themselves.