On 'Veritable' and the Path to Linguistic Precision

I lately complained about the use of 'literally' as an intensifier as in 'She literally climbed the walls/shit a brick/had a cow/blew a gasket, etc.' But as the astute Blar points out in a comment to that post and also here, does not consistency demand that I lodge a parallel complaint against 'veritably'? But as Blar indicates, I myself used the phrase "that veritable spider man of the Web" in connection with the estimable Dr. Hodges! (Is Blar becoming a scholar of my posts?) But Hodges' dexterity is certainly not that of any spider man as his recent rapid stair descent indicates. So how he can he truly or veritably be a spider man?

How shall I defend myself against this charge of inconsistency? There is no use in 'pulling an Emerson' and quoting the line about consistency being the hobgoblin of little minds. For to do that would be to equivocate on two senses of 'consistency,' logical and Emersonian.

The truth of the matter is that I have no defense. I never gave a moment's thought to the propriety of 'veritable.' I went with the lingusitic flow like a no-good lemming. Blar is right: 'literal' and 'veritable' stand and fall together. So I shall mend my ways and abjure such expressions as, 'She ate a veritable crapload of gnocchi.'

The moral of the story is that when one starts down the road of linguistic precision -- or is it preciosity? -- one is bound to find plenty of faults in one's writing and speaking. That classicist and curmudgeon, Michael Gilleland, made a point a while back that he borrowed from C. S. Lewis about 'significant.' Like many others, I have used this to mean many, as in 'There have been a significant number of fatal accidents at this intersection.' The question to ask is: Significant of what?

Is this all just an effete and pedantic exercise? I don't think so. Precision of language subserves precision of thought and action. In the political sphere, precision of language helps keep ideologues and propagandists in check.

Comments

[Blar]

I'm afriad that google is a more diligent scholar than I, with a more prodigious memory. It even remembers writings of yours that I've never seen before, like this scholarly piece where you claim that "a veritable abyss separates being and nonbeing."

I do not mind these uses of 'veritable' and I do not think that 'literal' and 'veritable' must stand or fall together. What the example of 'veritable' really shows, I think, is that not every linguistic change that abandons its roots is a degeneration. 'Veritable' is thriving in its new niche, while the strain on its old niche is minimal. For now, 'literally' is awkward and distracting in its new role, although perhaps over time it will settle in as well as 'veritable' has. 'Veritable' is sometimes the best way to stress that a metaphor is being used and that it's an apt one. Consider these two examples that google discovered for me:

1. Report calls Canadian border "a veritable sieve"

2. A veritable pharmacy of illegal substances was discovered in [his] residence

Today's challenge is to rephrase these examples to omit the word 'veritable'. If the results are as good as the originals, then I'll consider abandoning 'veritable'. Until then, I'll be admiring the image of a veritable pharmacy of illegal substances.