Now, let us suppose Hindi is not such a rich language. One, who has a good vocabulary, could be eloquent speaker. Let me further explain: English is a rich language. The only way how "eloquence" and "articulation" seem similar is that both of them are normally found in a good speaker. However, "eloquence" of speech is only about clarity, lucidity and smoothness of speech. This is precisely what is called "an articulated speech". As one articulates during speech (that is, one moves the limbs), the words of mouth get supplemented with the moves and the speech becomes forceful and more effective. To me, "eloquence" in speech is about lucidity and smoothness of speech, while "articulation" is about forcefulness of speech. This seems to be the view of Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Synonyms, anyway. In their overlapping sense related to "clear or easy expression," then, articulate and eloquent differ primarily in their emphasis- articulate emphasizing accuracy in representing or conveying an underlying thought or feeling, and eloquent emphasizing the feeling of the speaker or writer as well as his or her effectiveness in conjuring or evoking a desired response in the hearer or reader.Īrticulate thus tends to apply to highly effective precision in expression, as in a finely wrought chain of well-chosen words, and eloquent to passionate inspiration, as in an irresistible flood of moving words. Eloquent usually implies fluency but it suggests also the stimulus of powerful emotion and its expression in fervent and moving language it is applicable not only to speakers but to writers and cab be extended to things that convey similar suggestions It implies the use of language which exactly and distinctly reveals or conveys what seeks expression. Articulate is as often applied to thoughts and emotions with reference to their capacity for expression as to persons or their utterances. Vocal, articulate, fluent, eloquent, voluble, glib can mean being able to express oneself clearly or easily, or showing such ability. Here are the relevant parts of that entry in the dictionary: Eloquent is also applicable to words, style, and speech when a power to arouse deep feeling or to evoke images or ideas charged with emotion is impliedīut the Dictionary of Synonyms also bundles articulate and eloquent together in a group that includes voluble, vocal, fluent, and glib. or which gives a definite and clear suggestion of a condition, situation or character. which reveals with great or impressive force one's thoughts, ideas, or feelings. The sense of eloquent that is not closely related to articulate is the one that makes it a synonym of expressive, significant, meaningful, pregnant, and sententious-words that, MW says "mean clearly conveying or manifesting a thought, idea, or feeling or a combination of these." With regard to eloquent in this sense, the dictionary offers this commentary: The sense of articulate that is not closely related to eloquent is the one that makes it a synonym of oral and vocal because, according to Merriam-Webster, they "can all mean uttered by voice or having to do with utterance." The dictionary says this about this sense of articulate:Īrticulate implies the use of distinct, intelligible language thus, speech is the uttering of articulate sounds articulate cries are those that are expressed in meaningful words rather than in meaningless sounds This helps explain why, when understood in their non-overlapping senses, the two words seem quite different, whereas, when viewed in their shared sense, they have a lot in common. Is this particular variance in usage a common thing among English speakers, or am I just weird?Īccording to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Synonyms (1984), both articulate (as an adjective) and eloquent belong to two distinct groups of synonyms-one group that the other word also appears in, and one group (each) that the other does not appear in. I suppose that one can also be eloquent but not truly articulate, but I feel this is very rare for having the ability to craft a sentence for a certain effect more-or-less requires a fairly strong grasp of the intended language. So one can be articulate but not eloquent, in my opinion. Their words are proper and correct, but not necessarily the most flowing or "fun" to read or listen to. However, when I use the adjective "articulate" I think of someone who simply has a strong understanding and usage of a language. Whether they do this consciously or unconsciously is not relevant for my usage. The individual puts effort into making their speaking more colorful or artistic. When I use the adjective "eloquent" I most often think of flowery, decorated, or crafted speaking. Is there an intended difference between the words "eloquent" and "articulate," or are they simply two synonymous adjectives?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |