Sorry to burst any bubbles, but the word perturbate was in print when
little Sam Clemens was just a child (1844). Here is the proof at a wonderful
free site named "Making of America,":
http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Flivn%2Fl
ivn0003%2F&tif=00082.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin
%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABR0102-0003-38&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50 You
will find the word in Question in the second column, in the paragraph that
begins with "In conclusion."



Terry (librarian on patrol)

Terry Ballard, Automation Librarian
Quinnipiac University, Bernhard Library
275 Mt. Carmel Ave.
Hamden, CT, 06518
203-582-8945         FAX:203-582-3451
http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/libraries/tballard

"My memory has a mind of its own."


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Slotta [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The word "perturbate"


I am afraid there has been a misunderstanding about one word. I was just
talking about the use of one word, "perturbate."

I was not talking about the word perturb, or perturbed, or perturbating, or
perturbs, or perturben, or perturber, or even the latin perturbare (per
[intensive] + turbare [to throw in disorder]). I wasn't talking about second
cousins of the word either. Nor am I interested in the Chinese equivalent of
any form of the word.

I am simply interested in the word "perturbate" as being attributable to
Twain for its first use in print or not. That's all. Those who lack a
capacity of concern in this matter need not reply.

Thanks,
Bob