Does ‘decimate’ really mean ‘destroy one tenth’?

Most people have a linguistic pet peeve or two, a useful complaint about language that they can sound off about to show other people that they know how to wield the English language. Most of these peeves tend to be rather irrational, a quality which should in no way diminish the enjoyment of the complainer. A classic example of this is the word decimate.

The complaint about the word typically centers on the fact that decimate is used improperly to refer to ‘destroying a large portion of something’, when the ‘true’ meaning of the word is ‘to put to death (or punish) one of every ten’.

There are several problems with this complaint. The first, and most obvious, is that language has an ineluctable desire to change, and there are almost no words in English which have been around for more than a few hundred years without taking on new meanings, changing their old ones, or coming to simultaneously mean one thing and the opposite (a type of word known as a contronym).

Which came first? The tithe or the punishment?

But the claim that decimate should be used to mean naught but to ‘put to death (or destroy) one of every ten’ has deeper problems than that. For it is not at all clear that this punitive sense is indeed the earliest definition of the word. The earliest Oxford English Dictionary citation of decimate in a punishing sense dates from 1600, in a work by John Dymmok, titled A Treatise of Ireland. Currently, decimate meaning ‘to tithe’ makes its first appearance in 1656 (more of which below). But the OED entry for decimate has not yet been revised and in the course of writing this article, I discovered an example of this meaning in a work of 1606 by Henoch Clapham called A Manual of the Bibles Doctrine. With just six years separating these citations at a time in history when far fewer writings remain, we cannot say with any certainty which meaning came first.

Going back even further

Decimation appears to be a slightly older word in English than the verb as it began to make an appearance in English writing in the early 16th century, some seventy years prior to decimate. Again, recent research can provide an earlier example than the current unrevised OED entry. It appears in a book by William Barlow, printed in 1528, where he writes ‘To forge excommunicacions For tythes and decimacions Is their continuall exercyse.’

If we look to the dictionaries of this time period the evidence suggests that this tithing sense of decimate was just as common, if not more so, as the sense of killing or punishing one of every ten. The first English dictionary to record the word was Thomas Blount’s magnificently titled Glossographia, published in 1656, which defines decimate as “to take the tenth, to gather the Tyth”, with no mention made of killing anyone, soldiers or otherwise. In Elisha Coles’ An English Dictionary, published some twenty years later, it is defined as  both ‘to tythe or take the tent’ and ‘also punishing every tenth man’. These are the only two dictionaries of the 17th century to define decimate (which is not terribly surprising, as there were very few such reference works at the time).

Think before you decimate

So given that these two meanings of decimate appeared almost simultaneously, why are we so obsessed with assigning the punitive meaning to the word? A likely answer is that people are falling prey to what is known as the Etymological Fallacy, a tendency to believe that a word’s current meaning should be dictated by its roots. Unfortunately for the etymological purists, decimate comes from the Medieval Latin word decimatus, which means ‘to tithe’. The word was then assigned retrospectively to the Roman practice of punishing every tenth soldier.

So, next time you attend a symposium (etymologically, drinking partner) with someone sinister (etymologically, left-handed), and they launch into a tirade about the misuse of this word, you’ll be able to decimate their argument in no time at all.

Posted on: September 10 2012 | Categories: English in use, Grammar and writing help | Tags: , , ,

Author

Ammon Shea is a consulting editor for American Dictionaries for Oxford University Press.

The opinions and other information contained in the Oxford Dictionaries Online blog posts do not necessarily reflect the opinions or positions of OUP.

  • Jon R

    Unfortunately this article appears to completely miss the point of the argument about ‘decimate’, which is not whether or not it strictly means “kill or punish”, but whether or not it is referring to a very large proportion of something being destroyed/killed/removed/etc, or only a tenth of it (i.e. a pretty small proportion).

  • Darren

    This article appears give even stronger reasons to argue that the “destroy large portion of something” meaning of decimate is wrong. Both the tithe meaning, and the punish 10% meaning, focus on doing something to 10% of something, whether that be punish it, or give it away (since a tithe is 10%). So the meaning of “do something to the majority leaving only a small amount such as 10% remaining” completely conflicts with both of these meanings. The correct meanings of decimate do not conflict as much as this article supposes.

  • Pingback: Does ‘decimate’ really mean ‘destroy one tenth’? | Latin Instruction in the 21st Century | Scoop.it

  • Pingback: Does ‘decimate’ really mean ‘destroy one tenth’? | LVDVS CHIRONIS 3.0 | Scoop.it

  • http://www.facebook.com/mrbubbatbubb Bubba T. Bubb

    Cohortes, si quae cessissent loco, decimatas hordeo pavit. – Suetonius
    (c. 69 – c. 122)

    Now don’t that just hurt? Seems like it was used in the ancient world after all.

  • Rory

    @Jon and Darren: the 10% meaning (both tithe and kill) was the meaning around 400 years ago. A lot of time has passed since then… About 400 years. A ‘girl’ was once any young person; a ‘deer’ was originally any kind of wild game: should we revert to the original meanings for those as well? Perhaps we should spell words as they were first spelled, too? Perhaps pronounce them as they were first pronounced?

    As the OED editors point out repeatedly on this site, a dictionary records how a word is used in contemporary practice, not how it ‘should’ be used. In contemporary usage, decimate doesn’t mean tithe or kill by 10%. It means destroy/remove/kill a large proportion of. If you use it to refer to the 10% thing, your intended message is less likely to get through, because you are intending a far less common meaning… Like, if I started using ‘girl’ in its original sense.

    Decimate is just used here as an example of a bigger concept: Etymological Fallacy, which you’re demonstrating.

    • Jon R

      Sorry, Rory, you’ve completely missed the point. Yes, of course language changes over time. If you read the article you would see it says so right there. In the context of this article, however, it claims initially to be discussing the whether or not decimate means a small proportion or a large proportion – but then actually the article does not discuss this point at all. So, what I am saying is not that people should not use decimate the way they do, but that this article fails to address its own chosen premise.

  • JulianB

    Though I admit I assumed the Roman military meaning was the “correct” one, I’ve always been happy for the word to be used figuratively to mean destroying roughly 10% of something. My peeve in this case is the use of “decimate” to mean “destroy almost everything”. I wonder if this is sometimes due to confusion with “devastate”?
    If I hear that a woodland was decimated by a hurricane, for example, my response might be that that wasn’t too bad, as some other areas lost up to 25% of their trees. Am I being unnecessarily pedantic?

    • JulianB

      p.s. and what are we to make of the phrase “literally decimated” in a news report? When I hear that one football team was literally decimated by another, it sounds like an extraordinarily bad-tempered match.

  • BobS

    I have always thought that ‘decimate’ meant ‘reduce to one-tenth’, not ‘…by one-tenth’. However, I don’t believe I have used the word in my writing in all my 5 years!

  • http://shiftercat.livejournal.com/ ShifterCat

    Let’s look at this from a usefulness perspective. We already have a word for “pay one tenth” — that’s “tithe”. We have several words for “devastate”. We don’t have another word for “kill one in every ten”. Therefore it’s useful to retain that definition of “decimate” for clarity’s sake.

  • Pingback: Does ‘decimate’ really mean ‘destroy one tenth’? | LiveLatin | Scoop.it

  • Pingback: Does ‘decimate’ really mean ‘destroy one tenth’? | IELTS throughout the Net | Scoop.it