Shoveling Nemo

The linguistic takeaway from a major snowstorm turns out to be that 'blizzard' is a relatively new term.

|
Melanie Stetson Freeman/TCSM
A snowman in front of a home holds a sign that says: 'Got power?' since large parts of the town were still without electricity after the blizzard, last month, in Scituate, Massachusetts.

Dear readers, the word of the moment here in New England is, inevitably, blizzard. And it turns out to be not all that old, at least not in its meteorological sense.

But didn't William Bradford and the Mayflower Pilgrims face blizzards? Other early explorers of the New World before that? And Beowulf and his crowd before that, back in the old country?

Well, no. The Online Etymology Dictionary, which tracks the Oxford English Dictionary pretty closely, traces blizzard, in the sense of "strong, sustained snowstorm," back only to 1859. Merriam-Webster Online pegs it as even later: 1870. Neither source offers much to explain its origin: "Obscure" is the best the etymology dictionary can offer. It speculates that there may be a connection with blaze in the sense of a "white spot," as on an animal, and notes that there is a Proto-Germanic root blas – suggesting "shining" or "white" – as in bleach, or the German Blitz, "lightning," which comes, of course, in white flashes.

I can buy this, although the whiteness here has been more than just a spot or a flash. Blizzard in the sense of a severe snowstorm came into general use in the United States during the winter of 1880-81, and perhaps was originally a colloquial figurative usage in the Upper Midwest – where they would have needed a word for "serious snowstorm." That means that during the Blizzard of 1978 – whose 35th anniversary came just days before the latest storm, Nemo, hit – blizzard had been in general use less than a century.

The National Weather Service online glossary defines a blizzard as a period of three hours or more involving winds of 35 miles per hour or more and falling or blowing snow reducing visibility to a quarter mile or less. It's the strength of the wind and not the amount of snow that is the critical factor.

Before it came to refer so concretely to a severe snowstorm, blizzard had other uses: It meant a "violent blow" or could refer to a "hail of gunfire," in the early 19th century.

Oxford says blizzard is probably "more or less onomatopoeic," which I have trouble swallowing. What do you hear during a severe snowstorm that sounds like "blizzard, blizzard, blizzard"?

What you do hear is wind, and the round-the-clock rumble of heavy equipment out on maneuvers – sometimes attempting to scrape away snow before it's begun falling in earnest. Before the worst sets in, there's the happy gurgly sound of small children, delighted to be towed on sleds down the street by daddies briefly liberated from their ordinary professional tasks but not yet needed as domestic shovelers in chief. Afterward come the sounds of the snowblowers, like an odd community orchestra; the sound of spinning wheels of cars; the rumble of still more heavy equipment through the streets.

Ethan Gilsdorf, writing at WBUR.org, recalled an episode on his street that illustrated the kind of miracle of neighborliness a serious storm can bring about: "[S]ometime before dawn, the loud, ill-mannered teen two doors down from me took his family's snow blower and cut a swath through the foot-high drifts, not only in front of his house, but down the entire block."

He's not the only one to observe how the kind of enforced timeout of a major storm has its advantages. It slows us down, focuses us on essentials, connects us with one another, and sometimes even makes us better people.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Shoveling Nemo
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Verbal-Energy/2013/0219/Shoveling-Nemo
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe