the use of "begging" in this phrase becomes readily apparent if you reverse the word order to reveal another usage: to leave the question "go begging" is not to provide an answer , but merely restate the premise. I believe I have heaard the phrase, "beggar the question", too, ---or did I just make this up?

I can't say I've ever heard "beggar the question" used, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone, somewhere, has used the phrase. It often happens that, if an idiom seems at first sight to make no literal sense, it will get garbled.

Presumably this question was inspired by Wordcrafter's post about begging the question in the Vocabulary Forum.

Yes, arnie, and I see you posted Quinion's excellent article about "beg the question." I confess...I have used it to mean "raise the question." I can't believe the original phrase, petitio principii means "laying claim to the principle."

BTW, welcome to our board, wordhusker!

Reviving a thread...

Too bad 'Wordhusker' didn't stick; I like his name!

I wrote a limerick on "begging the question" where I used the definition "to raise the question." I realize that there is controversy as to the meaning of the phrase, but hasn't it evolved enough to be able to use "raise the question" as a meaning? Both the AHD and the New Oxford Dictionary of English cite those meanings, though many dictionaries don't.

What do you think? Is this very new meaning going to stick (from the 1990s)? I think the original meaning is so subtle that you can hardly ever use it. I can't even come up with a situation.

BTW, Shu vehemently disagrees with the "raising the question" definition. If I find that reaction from most everyone here, I will delete the limerick.

Here is the limerick:

I ask, "How do we teach our young nurses
And doctors to keep out the hearses?"
It's called begging the question,
And gives indigestion,
Because when there is failure...Oh curses!

Ihave to agree with Shu on this one.

"Begging the question" is the common name of a very old logical fallacy. Since I first learned it way back in the last century, it has been used (or misused) to mean "raises the question," much to my chagrin. I imagine this happened because the user was ignorant of the original, and, to my mind, only legitimate, meaning of the phrase. I shudder whenever I hear anyone use it with its "evolved" meaning; then think, "Oh well, they don't know any better." This could easily be solved by reserving "begging the question" for the logical fallacy, and using "raising the question" for the new, "improved" meaning.

"Begging the question" (circular argument) is a very common fallacy and I should think it would be easy to find a way to use the term in conversation, especially at meetings.

See "Modern usage controversy" in Wikipedia.

You could also just say I'm an old fossil resistant to change, and call my argument an argumentum ad antiquitatem.

Tinman

I would only use the phrase to mean a circular argument, not in the newer sense. I wouldn't condone sending out a lynch mob after you for using it, though, Kalleh.

The link provided by tinman gives a link to another interesting article on Prescription and description.

That is a nice article, Arnie, and it addresses a subject that we've been talking a lot about here. My opinion on prescriptivism/descriptivism is still evolving, I think. I have a hard time living with "ain't!"

I have since added an Author's Note to the limerick, but I am also happy to delete it if people find it inappropriate:

While the original meaning of "begging the question" is to "take for granted or assume the truth of the very thing being questioned" (AHD), the meaning has evolved, according to AHD and the New Oxford Dictionary of English to mean "to ask the question." However, not all linguists or lexicographers (or my husband!) agree with the new meaning.

quote:

However, not all linguists or lexicographers ... agree with the new meaning.

It's not a matter of agreeing, K., or even of using. I don't agree with how many words are used in formal or even informal English, but, if I were describing the language, I'd have to record those usages. Even prescriptivists, in their way, are describing them. It is the valorization of the usage (or abusage) that Ps and Ds disagree on. It is just some of the bêtes noirs of the Ps are incorrect grammatically or historico-linguistically. Just because somebody in the 18th century decided to censure English speakers / writers for ending sentences with a preposition or splitting an infinitive, against all evidence and just plain how the lanugage works, doesn't make them correct. Ps attack Ds for being permissive and that this alleged permissiveness leads to a decay and degradation of the language, but languages changed in the selfsame ways in the millennia before descriptive linguists existed (roughly the 20th century).

Okay. So, Zmj, what do you think of my usage of "begging the question"...personally, that is? I really am interested in what Wordcrafters think, not necessarily what the prescriptivists versus the descriptivists think.

quote:

what do you think of my usage of "begging the question".

I understand it. I never refer to the logical fallacy as anything but petitio principii, but then that's how I learned it way back when. The problem, for me, with the term begging the question is that it's a misleading loan translation of petitio principii.

No, no, no, Kalleh, honey. You misunderstand me.

I would prefer that "begging the question" be confined to its original sense of the logical fallacy, but I don't feel strongly about that. But I do feel, vehemently, that the other sense (call it the "BTQ newer sense") has been misdefined.

Let me explain. Sometimes a chain of argument will naturally lead to a further important question; it can be said to "raise" that question. And sometimes it will go of on a tangent and avoid the issue at hand; it will "duck the question". To me, BTQ's newer sense means the latter, but some seem to think it means the former.

[Confusing typo corrected 10/17]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: shufitz,

Wordcrafters...let's not worry about explaining edits. We are a friendly board, and I think we can trust that all edits are done in good faith.

Well, Shu, what you are saying then is that the definitions seem to be contradictory? The fact is, Quinion does cite three definitions of 'begging the question': 1) Raise the question; 2) Assume the thing that you're trying to prove (a circular argument); or 3) Avoiding the question. Number 3 apparently derived from the subtlety of definition #2. Therefore Quinion, at least, thinks you shouldn't use 'beg the question' to mean 'raise the question' as it would cause confusion if you really mean 'avoid the question.'

In most cases where I've heard it used, it has always meant to 'raise the question,' though I suppose I could have misunderstood its use. It's an interesting conundrum!

In reading about this in Quinion, I found that the whole confusion arose in the first place because of a poor translation of petitio principii, which is better translated as 'laying claim to the principle.' That would make a whole lot more sense to me.