There’s a word that I like – ‘prescient’ [pre + science]. I like how it feels in my mouth but I also always liked what I thought it meant – to bring to a situation, or a moment, a deep understanding of what is going on and what to bring to the moment to improve or survive it.
But it just means to appear to know the future. The dictionary definition is thin and it wasn’t listed in my thesaurus. So I went down my word rabbit hole.
So I know what the word ‘science’ means – to have knowledge. Although my dictionary added to that – ‘making knowledge’ which I really like. Just a couple words down I found a word I’ve never seen before: ‘scilicet’ [sil’ I set’] which is to be permitted to know. Science + license.
My trusty little ‘Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus’ didn’t list prescient – but I did find science and followed that – it also has a section that lists words by topic and that’s where I found ‘percipient’, to perceive keenly or readily. So I could just use ‘perceptive,’ but that isn’t as lovely a word and it doesn’t feel active enough for the concept I have in my head. It works, I guess. But I wish I could find a word that encompasses both prescient and perceptive.
That happens to me a lot – being in love with a word that I think means more than it does. Thinking about words like that always sends me down these fun rabbit holes. But I used to use the internet like everyone else to find the answers but they were rarely satisfying and they always felt incomplete. So I went to the bookstore and purchased the thesaurus and dictionary. My word investigations haven’t been the same since.
It’s hard to stumble on something during an internet search – at least on something I could trust. It’s too easy to be satisfied with the quick answer. But understanding – ‘making knowledge’ – takes time and strategy. Things lead to other things and that makes my head buzz in a very pleasing manner. I’m learning and discovering – or rediscovering – new things and I can’t experience that buzz if I can’t trust the sources. I just don’t derive the same value.
I trust Webster. Not because its biblical in its righteousness – it’s not – and I would not be surprised or devastated if I found a mistake in it. But I trust it because we English speakers all agree (in general) that it represents our language. Sure – I know a few folks who would try to argue that point with me – frankly, these same people ague that aliens move among us and that the DMV is part of a Deep State Cabal.
Then there’s the whole touch and smell of a physical book full of words. Books are still the greatest invention of mankind!
Here’s an example of usage:
Sean knocked on the door, his gift under one arm and the umbrella in the other. The rain was coming down so hard that it splashed off his umbrella onto his lower pant legs. He worried that he would make a mess of his host’s foyer as the door opened and he was welcomed in. He wondered that he wasn’t nervous. He wouldn’t know anyone in the room but her. He handed Susan’s gift to her mom and shook himself off. Inside the party was ramping up. As soon as Susan saw him, she broke away from the group and held out her hands. She looked at him and tilted her head with a questioning smile. He had a prescience about him. “What?” She asked. “You’ll see”. And he knew.
I’m not convinced that expresses what I’m trying to say. But in this situation – his gift would turn out to be the most perfect thing.
I’ll keep looking.
Tuesday Kuykendall 