Aug 13, 2012 04:10
11 yrs ago
English term
Ukraine
Creative and accurate
Native in: Russian 
Works in: English to Russian, Russian to English, Ukrainian to English, and 2 more.
is grown dull
English
Art/Literary
Ships, Sailing, Maritime
History
Dear colleagues,
I can not quite understand this 'grown dull' in the sentence:
“Other nations can make nimble vessels, but England is grown dull, and must be contented with sluggish and unserviceable ships”.
England became too lazy, or had stagnated (became stale) and was quite happy with its sluggish ships?
The time period is mid 1600s.
Thanks a lot!
I can not quite understand this 'grown dull' in the sentence:
“Other nations can make nimble vessels, but England is grown dull, and must be contented with sluggish and unserviceable ships”.
England became too lazy, or had stagnated (became stale) and was quite happy with its sluggish ships?
The time period is mid 1600s.
Thanks a lot!
Responses
+4
35 mins
Martin Riordan
Brazil
Brazil
Native in English
&
English
Works in field
Brazil
Brazilian lawyer - 40+ years in Brazil
Native in: English (Variants: British, UK, Irish, US, Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, Scottish) , Portuguese (Variants: Brazilian, Mozambican, Angolan, European/Portugal) 
Works in: Portuguese to English, English to Portuguese, English, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
11
Selected
has become unimaginative and uncreative
To make better and faster ships requires imagination, innovation, creativity. I understand the phrase to mean that these qualities were lacking in England and therefore the English ships were "sluggish and unserviceable".
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 54 days (2012-10-06 20:18:09 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------
That's all right! I hope you are better now. :-)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 54 days (2012-10-06 20:18:09 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------
That's all right! I hope you are better now. :-)
Note from asker:
| Thank you very much! Please accept my apologies for not grading it promptly, was very ill. :( |
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Selected automatically based on peer agreement."
+1
36 mins
David Hollywood
Native in English
&
English
worked for int. orgs (IMF, OAS, IDB)
Native in: English
Works in: Spanish to English, German to English
England has lost the edge
:)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 36 mins (2012-08-13 04:47:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
not what it used to be ...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 40 mins (2012-08-13 04:51:18 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
has fallen back and not come up with anything really new
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 55 mins (2012-08-13 05:05:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
has not produced anything innovative
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 36 mins (2012-08-13 04:47:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
not what it used to be ...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 40 mins (2012-08-13 04:51:18 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
has fallen back and not come up with anything really new
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 55 mins (2012-08-13 05:05:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
has not produced anything innovative
6 hrs
has become slow-witted (with a suggestion of clumsiness and lack of sharpness)
I take it that this text was written in the 1600s; it certainly sounds like it. In order to assess what the writer might have meant by "dull", the best we can do is to consult Dr Samuel Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language, first published in 1755, the earliest available to us; we cannot be sure, in principle, that the word had the same meanings it has today.
Johnson offers the following definitions of "dull" (I have omitted his illustrative examples from literature):
1. Stupid; doltish; blockish; unapprehensive; indocile; slow of understanding.
2. Blunt; obtuse [referring to a blade: not sharp].
3. Unready; awkward [that is, clumsy and lacking in agility].
4. Hebetated; not quick [lacking in acuity].
5. Sad; melancholy.
6. Sluggish; heavy; slow of motion.
7. Gross; cloggy; vile.
8. Not exhilarating; not delightful.
9. Not bright [applied to a mirror or a light, for example]
10. Drowsy; sleepy."
http://archive.org/stream/dictionaryofengl01johnuoft#page/n6...
No. 8 corresponds to the primary meaning of "dull" today: boring, tedious; but as we can see, "dull" primarily noted a lack of mental agility and a slowness of intelligence and understanding in that period.
Writers in this period tended to be very fond of verbal ingenuity and wordplay. I think the primary meaning of "dull" here corresponds to Johnson's first definition: the point is mental slowness. The idea is that other nations are quicker-witted and make quick (nimble) ships, whereas England has become slow-witted and therefore makes slower (sluggish) ships: dull in Johnson's sense no. 6.
However, other meanings of "dull" are also relevant and implicit here: lacking in sharpness (a dull blade), brightness (a dull light) and agility (dull of movement).
Thus there is a neat and quintessentially seventeenth-century association of metaphorical and literal qualities, primarily slowness.
Johnson offers the following definitions of "dull" (I have omitted his illustrative examples from literature):
1. Stupid; doltish; blockish; unapprehensive; indocile; slow of understanding.
2. Blunt; obtuse [referring to a blade: not sharp].
3. Unready; awkward [that is, clumsy and lacking in agility].
4. Hebetated; not quick [lacking in acuity].
5. Sad; melancholy.
6. Sluggish; heavy; slow of motion.
7. Gross; cloggy; vile.
8. Not exhilarating; not delightful.
9. Not bright [applied to a mirror or a light, for example]
10. Drowsy; sleepy."
http://archive.org/stream/dictionaryofengl01johnuoft#page/n6...
No. 8 corresponds to the primary meaning of "dull" today: boring, tedious; but as we can see, "dull" primarily noted a lack of mental agility and a slowness of intelligence and understanding in that period.
Writers in this period tended to be very fond of verbal ingenuity and wordplay. I think the primary meaning of "dull" here corresponds to Johnson's first definition: the point is mental slowness. The idea is that other nations are quicker-witted and make quick (nimble) ships, whereas England has become slow-witted and therefore makes slower (sluggish) ships: dull in Johnson's sense no. 6.
However, other meanings of "dull" are also relevant and implicit here: lacking in sharpness (a dull blade), brightness (a dull light) and agility (dull of movement).
Thus there is a neat and quintessentially seventeenth-century association of metaphorical and literal qualities, primarily slowness.
Note from asker:
| Thank you for the detailed explanation! |
Something went wrong...