Is there any kind of gall other than unmitigated gall? Have you ever met a hussy who wasn't brazen? Have you ever applied "blithering" to any noun other than "idiot?"
Anybody who flatly denies having used those words in pairs is talking arrant nonsense (and the only time we use "arrant" is with "nonsense"). These wedded words are faithful to each other: you never hear "unmitigated nonsense" or "arrant gall," "blithering hussy" or "brazen idiot." The words never stray from their lifetime partners in cliche.
Here's an exception: the verb "denies," as used above, has broken up with the adverb "flatly" and moved in with another suitor. Apparently "flatly denies" is not mouth-filling enough. Those who deny (or are in denial, to use the hottest psychobabble) want a word partner with a fiercer, yet more intellectual connotation.
Senator John Kerry shot down a salacious rumor recently with "I just deny it categorically." Asked about charges that al-Qaeda prisoners were being maltreated at our base in Cuba, a spokeswoman for Joint Task Force/Guantanamo replied, "They're categorically false, completely untrue." And in Madrid, asked if he planned to switch football clubs, the English metrosexual soccer star David Beckham said, "I can categorically deny I have had any meetings with Roman Abramovich."
Farewell, "flatly;" a more ringing emphasizer has run off with "denial." Though "angrily," "hotly" and "flatly" are used by journalists to characterize the denials of interviewees, deniers themselves choose the modifier made famous by philosophers.
"As used originally by Aristotle," wrote Sir William Hamilton in his 1866 classic on logic, "the term `categorical' meant merely `affirmative' and was opposed to `negative.' By Theophrastus it was employed in the sense of `absolute' ... opposed to `conditional;' and in this signification it has continued to be employed by all subsequent logicians."
Aristotle used `category' to classify 10 predicaments. It was the 18th-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant who laid down an unconditional ethic, binding on every reasoning being: "Act as if the maxim from which you act were to become, through your will, a universal law." This became known as his "categorical imperative."
"What is a `categorical denial' as contrasted with a `denial?'" ask Tom and Carol Creel in e-mail-land. (If you're going to send a digigram to onlanguage@nytimes.com, please say where you're from.) "We have never heard anyone make an `uncategorical' denial."
That word, not in use, would mean "imprecise, conditional, hypothetical, tentative." The word that has clasped "denial" to its bosom, snatching it from "flatly," is categorical: "direct, unconditional, pertinent, clear." The noun "category" places subjects in separate folders for easy locating and study; the adjective "categorical" calls up the sense of orderly, defined classifications, defeating the army of ignorance in detail.
If you want to emphasize your denial without sounding lawyerly or philosophical, try "absolutely."
RECUSE to the rescue
Justice Antonin Scalia, who recuses himself from Supreme Court cases about 10 times a year, decided -- in a 21-page memo -- not to disqualify himself from a case about Vice President Dick Cheney's refusal to reveal the names of members of an energy task force. The Sierra Club had charged that because he and Cheney had been guests on a duck-hunting trip, Scalia should not participate in the case. Scalia countered that because the vice president had been sued not personally but in his official capacity, much precedent existed for justices to sit in that circumstance.
"Since I do not believe my impartiality can reasonably be questioned," he wrote, "I do not think it would be proper for me to recuse."
But here's the head-scratcher: Why did he not write "recuse myself?" This verb, meaning "to withdraw from judging," is usually transitive, taking an object like "myself." Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that any suggestion "as to why a justice should recuse himself in a pending case is ill considered."
But a school of thought holds that "recuse" is intransitive. Judge Ronald Kessler of the King County, Washington, Superior Court sends along this citation: "Strictly speaking," wrote the Court of Appeals of Washington in the 1992 State versus Kron, "to `recuse' is to challenge the judge. In response, the judge may or may not disqualify himself; he does not recuse himself. `Recusal' is the process that results in the judge's disqualification."
I'll hear from other lawyers and judges on this, and I hope from Scalia, who speaks as strictly as anybody. But let me nit-pick one usage in his memo analyzing the limits of conflict of interest and his view of the impropriety of failing to sit. In noting that Justice Byron White went on a skiing vacation with Bobby Kennedy in 1963, Scalia wrote, "Justice White was close friends with Attorney General Robert Kennedy."
Which is more precise: "close friends with" or "a close friend of?"
Five years ago, I put that to the great usagist Jacques Barzun. He found a shade of difference: "`Friend of' refers to an established relationship. `Friends with' gives the connotation of `friendly toward,' referring to the attitude rather than the firm relationship. `I'm friends with her,' in my book, is not incorrect, but is informal."
Final note about that word "recuse," from the Latin recusare, "to object or demur." During the Jimmy Carter administration, I wrote that Attorney General Griffin Bell had "recused himself" in a case.
He then held up the Times in a Carter Cabinet meeting and noted a typographical error in the article: "It says here I `rescued' myself -- and, come to think of it, that's exactly what I did."
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under