I can't believe Clive's character said 'unalienable' instead of the correct 'inalienable' - TWICE! - when discussing the Declaration of Independence. For a movie about words, that was a pretty egregious error on the part of either the actor or the script writer.
shareThere was no error. The official copy of the Declaration uses the word "unalienable," which means exactly the same thing as "inalienable." Nowadays, the latter version is preferred.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/unalienable.htm
I'm an old man and have always used "inalienable". Maybe 100 years ago we used unalienable.
shareI stand corrected and apologize. I clearly did not know that.
shareIf you haven't anytime lately, get a complete copy of the movie of 1776 (not the version originally released, with the cuts Richard Nixon requested and Jack Warner imposed), and watch it. Or if you have a really good live production near you (unlikely, I know), go see it. Near the end of either one of those is a wonderful little scene, with John Adams and Thomas Jefferson arguing over whether the word should be "inalienable" or "unalienable." I forget now which one argues for which word, but Jefferson ends up prevailing, with Adams planning how he'll get the word changed later. That exchange is based on a disagreement the two had in real life, though I'm not sure whether it was actually verbal or written. Anyway, this discussion reminded me of that. Just another case where it seems like "everything I know, I learned from musical theater."
Multiplex: 100+ shows a day, NONE worth watching. John Sayles' latest: NO distribution. SAD.
who are you, John Adams? ;)
share