Ironical

Question

I know the difference between "historic" and "historical," but is there a difference between "ironic" and "ironical"?

Usenet · Accepted Answer

Please enlighten me as to the difference between "historic" and "historical."

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Please enlighten me as to the difference between "historic" and "historical."[/nq]
Historic events are merely those that happened
in the past. Historic events are only those of
memorable importance.

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Please enlighten me as to the difference between "historic" and "historical."[/nq]
The edictionary is your friend... but OK:
Historic and historical are differentiated in usage, though their senses overlap. Historic refers to what is important in history: the historic first voyage to outer space. It is also used of what is famous or interesting because of its association with persons or events in history: a historic house. Historical refers to whatever existed in the past, whether regarded as important or not: a historical character. Historical refers also to anything concerned with history or the study of the past: a historical novel; historical discoveries. The differentiation between the words is not complete. They are often used interchangeably: historic times or historical times.

The American Heritage Dictionary
So according to AHD they are "often used interchangeably" that may be the case, but I don't think they should be.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Please enlighten me as to the difference between "historic" and "historical."[/nq]
[nq:1]Historic events are merely those that happened in the past. Historic events are only those of memorable importance.[/nq]
Oy!

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Historic events are merely those that happened in the past. Historic events are only those of memorable importance.[/nq]
[nq:1]Oy![/nq]
I prefer the last line of "1066 and all that".
And wasn't there another line in that book about "memorable things"?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Please enlighten me as to the difference between "historic" and "historical."[/nq]
[nq:1]The edictionary is your friend... but OK: Historic and historical are differentiated in usage, though their senses overlap. Historic refers ... historical discoveries. The differentiation between the words is not complete. They are often used interchangeably: historic times or historical times.[/nq]
Doesn't 'historical' limit itself to things that we have a written or oral history for? After all, we have the word 'prehistorical', don't we?: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prehistorical&r=67

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Oy![/nq]
[nq:1]I prefer the last line of "1066 and all that". And wasn't there another line in that book about "memorable things"?[/nq]
No, it must have been about "Memorable Things",
Jan

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I prefer the last line of "1066 and all that". And wasn't there another line in that book about "memorable things"?[/nq]
[nq:1]No, it must have been about "Memorable Things",[/nq]
Well, I found my copy in less than 2 minutes' search, though I hadn't read it in almost 40 years.
I think this part is quotable: "1066 and all that" Subtitle: " A memorable history of England"
Further described: "Comprising all the parts you can remember, including one hundred and three good things, five bad things and two genuine things.

Sounds as though Martha Stewart encountered the credits page at some time.

I don't know that I ever read the copyright info: "1931 by E.F. Dutton & Co. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S. A." No printing or publishing date is provided. I purchased the book in '61 or '62 on the recommendation of an English roommate.
Will one of the Latin scholars in the group please translate the DEDICATION for me? ABSIT OMAN
I think there must be something funny about it.
Here is the copyright violation : "History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember." And in a following paragraph: " . . . 2 of the 4 Dates originally included were eliminated at the last moment, a research done at the Eton and Harrow match having revealed that they are not memorable ."
I can't remember the title Richard Armour's derivative book (mainly dealing with US memorable things), so it can't be very historical, although it had its good parts. It may be that my reference to "memorable things" can be traced to that work. (Well, here is Google "Four Books by Richard Armour Author of It All Started With Columbus"
http://www.woodbridgepress.com/Pages/Armour.html )

Usenet · Answer

"N.B. Do not on any account attempt to write on both sides of the paper at once."?
[nq:2]No, it must have been about "Memorable Things",[/nq]
[nq:1]Well, I found my copy in less than 2 minutes' search, though I hadn't read it in almost 40 years. ... things and two genuine things. Sounds as though Martha Stewart encountered the credits page at some time.[/nq]
If so, it seems she edited it rather hard for American readers.

(quote)
A Memorable History of England, comprising
all the parts you can remember, including 103
Good Things, 5 Bad Kings and 2 Genuine Dates
(end)
[nq:1]I don't know that I ever read the copyright info: "1931 by E.F. Dutton & Co. All rights reserved. Printed ... or publishing date is provided. I purchased the book in '61 or '62 on the recommendation of an English roommate.[/nq]
(the above was from the 23rd edition, 1949, Methuen, London)

Regards
John

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]No, it must have been about "Memorable Things",[/nq]
[nq:1]Well, I found my copy in less than 2 minutes' search, though I hadn't read it in almost 40 years. ... including one hundred and three good things, five bad things and two genuine things.[/nq]
"including 103 Good Things, 5 Bad Kings, and 2 Genuine Dates", in my edition.
[nq:1]Sounds as though Martha Stewart encountered the credits page at some time. I don't know that I ever read the ... or publishing date is provided. I purchased the book in '61 or '62 on the recommendation of an English roommate.[/nq]
First published 1930 by Methuen, although that contains a "Preface to the Second Edition", as follows:
"A first edition limited to one copy and printed on rice paper and bound in buck-boards and signed by one of the editors was sold to the other editor, who left it in a taxi somewhere between Piccadilly Circus and the Bodleian."
[nq:1]Will one of the Latin scholars in the group please translate the DEDICATION for me? ABSIT OMAN I think there must be something funny about it.[/nq]
It combines the Latin tag "Absit omen" (May no evil result) with the name of the (then) well-known English historian Sir Charles Oman.
[nq:1]Here is the copyright violation : "History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember." And in ... that work. (Well, here is Google "Four Books by Richard Armour Author of It All Started With Columbus" http://www.woodbridgepress.com/Pages/Armour.html )[/nq]
Sellar and Yeatman produced three follow-ups: "And Now All This" (which isn't nearly as good) and "Horse Nonsense" and "Garden Rubbish" (which I've never seen). "1066" was also "ingeniously dramatised by the late Reginald Arkell, whose version was staged twice in London and is still a favourite with amateur dramatic clubs" (blurb to the 1960 Penguin edition).

Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".

Ironical

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions