-
“Because this tendency seems irreversible, you might take any of three tacks. First, you might keep (for now) to the traditional distinction, which is fading. Just don’t be the last to cling to it. Second, you might embrace the reversal in meaning; everyone will know what you mean, and the risk to credibility is slight because so few people ever learned the old distinction. Third, you might treat these verbs as skunked terms and avoid them altogether for the next couple of centuries while the new meanings solidify.”
–
Bryan Garner, in his 2/8/12 Garner’s Usage Tip of the Day, on the evolving usage of the verbs ‘repel’ and ‘repulse,’ although I tend to see it as sound advice for a wide range of everyday conundrums.
(More from Mr. Garner: [While both] mean “to drive back,” the traditional distinction is that “repulse” is primarily physical {after repeated warnings, he was repulsed from the premises}; “repel” is primarily figurative {the body odors on the subway repelled her}…Today, however, the verbs are as likely to be used interchangeably, perhaps because “repulse” seems to answer to “repulsive” (= disgusting, obnoxious) and “repel” to “repellent” (= that pushes away or beats back).)
