words

Outrage

Nicholas Bagnall
Sunday 19 January 1997 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

I Was rather surprised to see the word outrage in large headline- type on the front page of the Daily Telegraph last week. "Outrage as Irish free IRA suspect" it said, explaining how the news had infuriated Unionist MPs. I would have thought this was more a tabloid word. Popular newspapers use it a lot; it is part of that highly formal, almost ritual language that gives them so much of their charm. There was an example in the Daily Mail on the same morning as the Telegraph's front page story, but it was at the bottom of page 19 ("Outrage at `secret EU plan' to control taxes"), for outrage in such papers is not nearly so serious a matter as it is in the broadsheets, being the proper tabloid word for those who are annoyed, or perhaps more than a little upset about something: a notch, but only a notch, up from fury.

Yet its origins have nothing to do with rage. It didn't split that way - the "r" belonged to its first half, not its second, and the age part of it was only a suffix, as in words like advantage. The Latin ultra meant "beyond", which in French became outre, so outr-age was a state of being beyond reason, or over the top. Since people who have lost control of themselves can indeed be said to rage, one can see how this little misunderstanding arose. But again anger didn't come into it much, at least at first. Violence, physical or otherwise, was what it was chiefly about. A journalist who writes of a terrorist bomb outrage is using the word as originally intended.

No doubt it was once pronounced "owtridge" on the analogy of voyage, advantage and the rest. The verb, meaning to do violence to life, limb, property or feelings, seems usually to have had the accent on "rage", if we are to go by the poets, who have tended to rhyme it with such words as sage and cage.

The 1991 OED insists that outraged has the accent on the first syllable, though it sounds much more heartfelt with the accent on the second, as I have often heard it used. The OED's 1991 definition was "Subjected to outrage, gross violence, or indignity; violated" - nothing, you may note, about anger here. The Shorter Oxford put things right two years later; it dated the definition "arouse fierce anger or indignation in" from the early 20th century.

Meanwhile the more we see it in newspapers the less fierce it gets.

Nicholas Bagnall

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in