It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Anyone Ever Proof-Read the Constitution???

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Supportive Source/Link:
www.archives.gov... harters/constitution_transcript.html

Has anyone ever proof-read the constitution of the United States of America?




"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union ...."



Curious choice of words.

"more perfect" ???

I always thought something either is or is not perfect.

If something is perfect, it is perfect.
So, how can something be "more perfect"?


Any thoughts?

I first heard this from the actor/comedian who used to play Arli$$ on the HBO series. He has a short special concerning how Pop Culture more so than actual facts has been recorded as history. Interesting special. I'll get back to this thread later with more details.

EDIT TO ADD:
Sorry if I misplaced this thread. It may belong in a "general" forum, but i did not really know what forum it would be best suited for.

If it gets moved, it is understandible. Thanks Mods.

[edit on 7-1-2007 by Esoteric Teacher]




posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
esoteric, they didn't just proof read it
they kept proof reading and nit-picking

they said MORE perfect because they were referencing how IMPERFECT the united states of america was under the articles of confederation

they knew that there could be no perfect union
but a MORE PERFECT union was possible



posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Yes, I agree with madnessinmysoul, the reference to more perfect refers to the failures of the articles of confederation to create a functional government.

There are also some misspellings in the Constitution explained here:

www.usconstitution.net...



posted on Jan, 8 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Just to add some icing to the two previous answers from a grammatical point of view; "perfect" had connotations of "completeness" in the 18th Century that has somewhat disappeared now. So in the sentence quoted, the writers are stating they wish to form a government where the state of union between the colonies is more complete, more actualized, than was the case before the constitution. "Perfect" in this context does not mean without flaw.



posted on Jan, 8 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Esoteric, you are correct about the usage of perfect, but this was not made an official rule in the English language until the 20th century. So, it would have been acceptable in those times.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Toromos
Just to add some icing to the two previous answers from a grammatical point of view; "perfect" had connotations of "completeness" in the 18th Century that has somewhat disappeared now. So in the sentence quoted, the writers are stating they wish to form a government where the state of union between the colonies is more complete, more actualized, than was the case before the constitution. "Perfect" in this context does not mean without flaw.


I found another old usage source on english words, and how their meanings have changed over the centuries. I found it in one of my granmothers old books from 1904. In the book it does say the word perfect also was used to mean completeness, so I'm pretty sure you guys may be correct.

Thanks for the input guys. Although it still seems a little ackward for the wording, the meaning of the word maybe doesn't have the same meaning anymore. I wonder how many other words don't mean what they did 4 or 5 generations ago?

Just a thought, and thanks again guys,
john




 
0

log in

join