1  |   Order by index

Aug 10, 2002, 7:53pm

[View Quote] > Er, no, those are spelling differences, not intensity differences. "Worst" is more extreme than "worse"; and there is no "worser" or "worsest"

This double comparative has a long literary history beginning in the late 15c.: e.g. Chang'd to a worser shape thou canst not be-Shakespeare,
1591; I find she is A diuell, worser then the worst in hell-J. Ford, 1633; For I, e'en I, the bondsman of a worser man was made-W. Morris, 1887;
Some gals is better, some wusser than some-E. Pound, 1959; The people oh Lord Are sinful and sad Prenatally biassed Grow worser born bad-Stevie
Smith, 1975.

The Oxford English Dictionary's verdict (1928) on the status of the word is still about right: 'The word was common in the 16th and 17th c. as a
variant of 'worse', in all its applications. In modern use, it is partly a literary survival (especially in phrases like the worser part, sort,
half), partly dial. and vulgar.' Its vulgar use is illustrated by the following examples: Your poor dear wife as you uses worser nor a dog-Dickens,
1835; That's my new word. Yeah, it's gonna be worser. You know, worse to worser-Interview (US), 1990.

Cheers,
Kit
Can we be any more pedant?

1  |   Order by index