Wuthering Heights discussion

While reading the book, I always thought of Heathcliff as someone likely of both British and Gypsy origin. Perhaps either Eastern European or part-Indian.

But then the new movie came out, casting a Black male as Heathcliff. His acting was superb, but I wondered if Heathcliff was Eastern European or not. There is evidence on both sides, but as far as I'm concerned most gypsies aren't of African origin. And would not Linton have been a bit darker had Heathcliff been partly African?

Emily only said that Heathcliff was a bit different, but if Heathcliff had been of African descent wouldn't she have told us so?

*BTW, I do have some knowledge of the origin of Gypsies, but if my presumptions are wrong please let me know.

There are gypsies in Ireland and maintain their wanderlust, caravanning lifestyle. Whether they were in England in Brontean times is another matter.

It does seem odd to cast Heathcliff as a black man, it doesn't even make sense actually. The novel takes place in the 18th century, and I'm not sure if it would have even been legal for white and black people to marry. Heathcliff probably could have been sent to prison for being in involved with the female heroine. He also would have been treated much worse for his ethnicity. I'm by no means an expert, but those are my thoughts.
And, yes, I do think that gypsies are generally of Indian descent.

@Josh: read up some background at and take into account that the novel takes place in England, not Alabama. (Nor in South Africa… and the only other country noted for legislation regarding "miscegenation" didn't implement such laws until 1933.)

(GR won't display the link, but check the Wikipedia article on "Miscegenation", particularly the section on "Laws banning miscegenation.")

So that argument is completely off the wall.

@Elsie: But Brontë does tell us! Or at least intimates things to the alert reader. IMS, there is a description of Heathcliff's appearance as "moorish." Technically this would have referred to North African Muslims, who are generally not so much "black," but slightly darker than the typical Briton. However, in Shakespeare's "Othello," Iago ("the Moor") is typically played by very dark-skinned actors (or by white actors in blackface). So there is a long tradition of taking "moorish" and "black" as synonyms. There is also the implication that Heathcliff may have been from "Gypsy" background, where people from the various Romani groups were commonly described as "swarthy"--an adjective that covered a wide range of darker skin colors. The long and short of it is that there is adequate evidence that Heathcliff (at the very least) might be black, or at least with quite dark skin. Dark enough to shock sensibilities of society (despite the fact that there were no legal barriers).

Older films generally portrayed Heathcliff as white (Olivier, Dalton, Fiennes, …), but many of these were also made at a time when there was an assumption in mass-market cinema that a romantic hero had to be white, or the film wouldn't stand a chance at the weekend box office (particularly not in that so-important market of the USA, where miscegenation was illegal until relatively recently). So even if Brontë had described Heathcliff with words like "skin black as jade" (instead of her more discrete portrayal), Hollywood would have cast a blue-eyed blonde and called it (if anything) "cinematic license." Casting James Howston in 2011 is simply an acceptance of the fact that nowadays you can have a black hero in a romance. (Black heroes in comedy, action, and thriller have been around a bit longer.)

libellule wrote: "wouldn't the moors in this context be the moors in north England/Scotland?"

Not likely. Yes, there are the Yorkshire moors (as well as Dartmoor in the SW), but the adjective "moorish" in the period Brontë was writing was generally used in the sense I indicated. Again, look at the interpretation the word is given in Othello. You'll find that reflected in other literature from the Elizabethan straight through the Victorian (and even into the Edwardian) periods.

If you don't believe me, there are editions of OED you can check that document historical usage.

Also, the chief characteristic of the moor regions in most of England is "boggy" more than "wild." Heathcliff looked swamplike? I dinnae think so, lass.

(The one thing you've got going for your hypothesis, L., is that Brontë might have considered a marriage to a Scot even more socially outrageous than to a black man. In fact, so outrageous as to be unthinkable!-)

PS: The "moorish" discussion may be a red herring. I remember the word being brought up when I read the book in high school, long, long ago. The actual text I'm finding reads:

But Mr. Heathcliff forms a singular contrast to his abode and style of living. He is a dark-skinned gipsy in aspect. [Chapter 1]

"Dark-skinned" covers a variety of shades and is limited to no specific ethnicity. "Gipsy" may or may not be intended to be read literally as a specific ethnic group (it may also have been meant to convey a more general "not English born-and-bred"-ishness). "In aspect," of course, means "in appearance" (i.e., not necessarily indicating that he was born to Romany, just that he looked that way… his back story before his adoption is left, AFAICT, to the reader's imagination.)

I do, however, clearly remember my English teacher bringing up the possibility that Heathcliff might actually have been "black." This was probably intended to have a certain shock effect on a class of suburban American teenagers at a time when interracial relations, while no longer illegal in most of the U.S., still carried significant social stigmata. Brontë's text, as I read it, while opening the possibility leaves the question unanswered. There is, nevertheless, a certain charm in seeing this conjecture realized in a mass-market film romance so many decades later.

I think he was likely a gyspy. It seems to fit best for that time period.

libellule wrote: "Peter wrote: "PS: The "moorish" discussion may be a red herring. I remember the word being brought up when I read the book in high school, long, long ago. The actual text I'm finding reads:

But M..."

libellule wrote: "Peter wrote: "PS: The "moorish" discussion may be a red herring. I remember the word being brought up when I read the book in high school, long, long ago. The actual text I'm finding reads:

But M..."


I agree. But the one thing I'm confused about is, why would Emily talk about how Heathcliff was a "dirty, ragged, black-haired child" and why would Catherine say, "Why, how very black and cross you look! and how—how funny and grim!" if he had been black?

Wouldn't that be unusual for her to say if he was black? By then Catherine would already have thought it normal that he was black, so what would the need be? And also, Linton is described as being fair.

Heathcliff is also described as being a Lascar or an American or Spanish castaway.

It's possibly he was part black, like what you said about him not being a "regular black". That could mean multiple things.

Perhaps he was creole?

Gypsies were originally from Central Europe, Roumania I believe. There has been at least one photography monograph on the Irish gypsy culture. I also recall while there reading local newspapers from the Irish West Coast in which description of the "antics" of recent gypsy camps had wrecked havoc on the local population. Several members had been arrested for petty theft-ie. theft of poultry and the like. The article went on to generally describe Irish gypsy life. Apparently they move about the Irish countryside, looking for part time agricultural and unskilled work and for theft opportunities.

I met gypsy children in Dublin in 1980.
The children in Dublin were sniffing glue from plastic bags. I was photographing the area at the time when I witnessed a director of a local teen center refusing admittance to the small group of 6-8 gypsy children. He told me they had been previously extremely rowdy and disruptive and that he was not going to subject the other children to their ill behaviour. There was no prejudice or ill will on his part-he was simply doing his job and securing the place.

I always assumed Heathcliff was a British gypsy.

Geoffrey wrote: "Gypsies were originally from Central Europe, Roumania I believe. There has been at least one photography monograph on the Irish gypsy culture. I also recall while there reading local newspapers fro..."


Just to add what (I think) I know -

Gypsies (the Rom) are a people whose ancestry has been traced to ancient India.

I don't believe Irish gypsies (Travellers) share blood with the Rom, but I could be wrong about that. They have been shown to be a distinct cultural group in Ireland, separated from other Irish around 1000 years ago, and DO appear to have direct lineage to Viking peoples.

I picture Heathcliff as (Rom) gypsy. Think Yul Brynner (Romani on his mother's side,according to Wikipedia) .

British but of indeterminate ancestry

My takeaway is that he's more "swarthy" (and all that that denotes) rather than actually foreign. Since it's a Gothic novel, themes of darkness are going to play out somehow and making Heathcliff "dark" both contributes to the brooding of his character, and may also connote that his skin color is darker. I think he's supposed to be "different" and coloring would be one way to show his dark side and his differentness from the other characters.

@Marika: Never thought about it much, but yes, I've noticed that a lot of British gothic novels use darkness as a main point throughout their characters.

@Geoffrey: Are Irish gypsies the same as what some call "Black Irish?" And what you said was very interesting. English-Irish relations in general weren't always great, but perhaps even more so with British-British Gypsies.

Othello: Middle eastern or North African in appearance. At the time the story was written, the term "Moor" was more likely to mean "a Muslim" than to have any ethnological value.

Heathcliff: Gypsy - Dark hair, darker skin than a Caucasian and dark eyes.

That's how I've always seen these men.

An interesting question.

I don't think Emily provides any solid foundation for arguing that Heathcliff was black, but during that time in England "dark skinned" would basically mean "not northern European".

The quote "He is a dark-skinned gipsy in aspect." has been brought up a few times, but even this is not clear as "aspect" can mean "the way in which something is viewed", "as it appears to the mind", or even "in character". Based on Heathcliff as a person, one could argue the above quote as meaning "He was a dark-skinned gipsy in character."

Emily of course does tell the reader that Heathcliff physically had dark features, but perhaps she was intentionally vague about it to emphasize the contrast and mystery (one might say) of HC to the other characters.

Consider this post as someone thinking out loud, not someone offering an opinio

I think it could be helpful here to look at the racial discourse of the mid-nineteenth century to make sense of the varied descriptions of Heathcliff.

In the mid-nineteenth century the term "gypsy" could refer to a Romani individual, or it could more generally be used to describe someone who appears "non-English." Heathcliff's origins' are not known, it is clear, however, that he is not "pure" Anglo-Saxon and as such would be called "gypsy" until it becomes clear otherwise. Additionally, Heathcliff is found in Liverpool around 1770; Liverpool at this time was the third largest port for slave trade in Britain and by 1800 surpassed London and Bristol and accounted for nearly 85% of Britain's slave trading. When one considers that Britain was responsible for 55% of the world's slave trading at large by 1800, it becomes clear that Liverpool had a large population and black Africans and it becomes more likely that Heathcliff was African descent. But, let us not forget that Romani and African are not mutually exclusive. Brontë has left Heathcliff's origins unknown precisely to produce anxiety surrounding his race and his status so that she can then produce those systems that produce this anxiety.

I consulted Susan G. Meyer's "Imperialism at Home: Race and Victorian Women's Fiction" in preparing this response.

David wrote: "I think it could be helpful here to look at the racial discourse of the mid-nineteenth century to make sense of the varied descriptions of Heathcliff.

In the mid-nineteenth century the term "gyp..."

Wow. I didn't know that about Bristol, even though I knew the slave trade did go on in Britain. I should probably read that book sometime. I would like to learn more about the UK during the height of its colonialism. :)

Sheila
Yes, I am not sure either. I take it he was not Moorish, as from northern Africa, nor Negroid but of British gypsy Caucasians albeit olive skinned like Italians with black hair. I can`t see him as being Negroid or mulatto as I think Bronte would have given us more hints along those lines.

The description of his being "moorish" I take it, refers to his being wild and from being of the moors, where the novel takes place.
British and Irish relations were horrible for the longest of time and GB thought of the Irish as a heathen, promiscous race. They certainly were the latter in the 1600`s and 1700`s but by the 1800`s they swung to the other extreme as to garner respectability from their English overlords. Parnell was rendered ineffective in the late 19th century when it was discovered that he had an illicit lover.

The Brits were absolutely horrible to the Irish. For many years there was a law on the books that if an Englshman fancied an Irishman`s home, he could buy it for 5 pounds, with no right of refusal for the first owner.

Geoffrey wrote: "There are gypsies in Ireland and maintain their wanderlust, caravanning lifestyle. Whether they were in England in Brontean times is another matter."

There have been Romany gypsies in England since Tudor times at least. They were called 'gypsies' because people assumed that their darker skin meant that they came from Egypt, which may explain the confusion over whether Heathcliffe should be cast as gypsy or black.

I have always assumed he was gypsy because they talk about his ability with horses, which is one of the stereotypical things people associate with gypsies and horse fairs where gypsies would go to meet and trade horses were commonplace then (and there are still some today, like Appleby and Stow).

Kelly wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "There are gypsies in Ireland and maintain their wanderlust, caravanning lifestyle. Whether they were in England in Brontean times is another matter."

There have been Romany gypsie..."

I agree - as children we always thought gypsies originated in the middle east ie Egypt.

However, when I was at school (many years ago) studying Wuthering Heights we came to the conclusion that Heathcliffe was from north Africa. Coming from Liverpool, were Heathcliffe was found we decided he was a cabin boy, from the Barbary Coast (Tangiers way), who got lost in Liverpool while his ship was in port which then sailed without him. As it states in the book he was found abandoned there. We based our decision on the information that he looked like a moor/gypsy (Moors are from North Africa and in the UK being Moorish doesn't mean you are like the Yorkshire moors or any other moor in the UK). He couldn't speak at first i.e he didn't speak English so we assumed he was speaking either Berber or Arabic. With that in mind he could have been dark brown like the Berbers or light brown like an Arab.

This decision was made by about 20 15 year old girls from Liverpool and their Eng. Lit teacher in the 60's and I still think we got it about right. :)

I guess it would make sense if he was Arabic or North African. @Godfrey: Yes, the English treated the Irish absolutely horribly. Perhaps the turmoil between the Irish and English is worse than Irish and Italian or German and Irish...

Heathcliff was not black. There's no way they'd allow a black person near white women back then.

I agree he was most likely gypsy or Indian descent (the Empire brought many children of English and mixed Indian origin to the UK).

Not so long ago my own great grandparents would describe Welsh people as "Blackies" - it was their way

Josh wrote: "It does seem odd to cast Heathcliff as a black man, it doesn't even make sense actually. The novel takes place in the 18th century, and I'm not sure if it would have even been legal for white and b..." Agree, I think they were once believed to be Egyptians hence the name "Gypsies"... but are actually from India... This is what I have always read... could be wrong, I guess

Christine
That`s an interesting take but somehow I believe there to be too much of leaped conclusion on your part. He may simply have been a cabin boy. I always suspected that he was the actual son of his foster father, from an illicit union which took place elsewhere. You could easily conjecture that he grew up with a prostitute mother in the slums of Liverpool and had set to go off on high sea adventures, failed to meet the boat upon departure and was reclaimed by his true father, but whose parentage was never revealed.

I don't recall exactly where in the book where the word "gypsy" came up, but it did come up several times in reference to Heathcliff's appearance.
Which, being that gypsies (originally from India) married into the cultures they passed through, their blood lines are a varied mix.
And... during this time, wouldn't African people have been treated as slaves by the Europeans and Americans?
True, gypsies were often regarded as a lower race, but I think (historically, anyway) that Africans were treated much worse, and wouldn't be able to marry white women. Another post above pointed out a great point: If Heathcliff had been black, wouldn't Linton have been, I dunno, a bit more colored? He had white skin and pale blond hair.
So yeah, I agree... that casting an African man as Heathcliff is odd.

But hey - if his acting was good, then I say whatever :P

Geoffrey wrote: "There are gypsies in Ireland and maintain their wanderlust, caravanning lifestyle. Whether they were in England in Brontean times is another matter."

Gypsies are mentioned in the earlier books of Jane Austen, so they must have been.

Josh wrote: "It does seem odd to cast Heathcliff as a black man, it doesn't even make sense actually. The novel takes place in the 18th century, and I'm not sure if it would have even been legal for white and b..."

For all that Britain was a major slave trading nation, I don't think it ever had the kind of laws against interracial marriage for which other countries are infamous.

My sense it that 19th century readers of the novel would have taken Heathcliff to have the appearance of an English gypsy. What that means exactly to us is more complicated as we do not have the same easy sense of what a "gypsy" is (and I think people do not use that word so much anymore as it has acquired negative connotations). A 19th century's gypsy could be a member of the English Romany community, or perhaps an Irish traveller, or some other kind of wandering person from outside the mainstream of settled society.

The recent film's casting of black actors as young and old Heathcliff is not completely ridiculous. Heathcliff is picked up from Liverpool, which as a port city (and centre of the slave trade) would have had a certain black and coloured community. People's ideas of race were different in the past to what they are now (something we often forget), so it is just possible that a non-white Heathcliff in the late 18th century (when the book is set) would merely have been described as "dark". The director may however have just went with that casting decision to make Heathcliff's difference more clear to a modern viewer.

Ian wrote: "Josh wrote: "It does seem odd to cast Heathcliff as a black man, it doesn't even make sense actually. The novel takes place in the 18th century, and I'm not sure if it would have even been legal fo..."

hhhh not sure about that. I'm English and my ancestors diaries make it very clear how people described ethnic minorities.


I think the film makers didn't care to represent historic accuracy. The same way there's loads of historical inaccuracy in many other films based on Classics.

And yes there's been Travelers/gypsy's for many years in the UK. Mostly Romney and Irish.

Goddess wrote: "Ian wrote: "Josh wrote: "It does seem odd to cast Heathcliff as a black man, it doesn't even make sense actually. The novel takes place in the 18th century, and I'm not sure if it would have even b..."

I agree with Ian. Also I come from Liverpool and it has the oldest black community in the UK dating from the 1730's and it's always had mixed race marriages as they have never been illegal. To have Heathcliffe marry Miss Earnshaw would have been unusual but not illegal.

He was described in the book as 'gypsy like and dark' this might have been the nearest description they had, on the Yorkshire moors', for someone who had a dark complexion. As gypsy's spent a lot of time outdoors in all weather their complexions could have been quite swarthy and dark looking, not like your usual white pasty faced English man.

Geoffrey wrote: "Gypsies were originally from Central Europe, Roumania I believe. There has been at least one photography monograph on the Irish gypsy culture. I also recall while there reading local newspapers fro..."

Gypsies are not originally from Central Europe. They came out of India over 1000 years ago and the words Romany and Romania are coincidental that's all.

Fliss wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "Gypsies were originally from Central Europe, Roumania I believe. There has been at least one photography monograph on the Irish gypsy culture. I also recall while there reading loc..."

The term "gypsy" is rather confusing. I think all of them came from India, but I doubt that the Irish ones came from there, perhaps it became a generalization over the centuries that all gypsies resemble the ones prominent in Western Europe.

I have yet to meet a gypsy, I wonder what they would say about their ethnicity?

I always read it as Heathcliff being Roma. Also, Jane Eyre's Mr. Rochester had a mixed race legal marriage, even if he did keep her locked in the attic.

Although I have argued that it was just slightly possible for Heathcliff to have been black, (and the notion of attempting to transplant American "miscegenation" legislation to 18th C UK is blatantly uninformed), the most probable assumption (given that Austen is never too specific about his birth and breeding) is the gypsy/Roma guess. But it's just a guess.

As for the latest film version: a fair bit of TV and film of the last decade or so has been painting an unrealistic picture of a multi-culti past that never really existed. Just a couple of for instances: the flashback in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets to Hogwarts in the 1940s includes African wizards—not very likely. The Doctor Who episode "The Girl in the Fireplace" gives Mme. de Pompadour a black confidante in early 18th C. Paris—not very likely. Another Doctor Who, "Human Nature," puts Martha Jones in a pre-WWI situation that is slightly less improbable than the previous two, but still—not entirely likely.

None of these examples is completely impossible—throughout its history, Europe had a different relationship to sub-Saharan Africans than the US did. But none of them are likely. But since when did probability change a film producer's mind about casting a hot property?

Fliss wrote: "Gypsies are not originally from Central Europe. They came out of India over 1000 years ago."

Not to put too fine a point on it, you're both wrong.

Nobody knows where "Gypsies" "originally" came from. There are multiple conflicting theories, and to make things more complicated, there isn't even agreement on whether various groups who have been collectively referred to as Gypsies are even of the same origin. Current ethnography distinguishes between Sinti, Roma, Kale, and other groups, all of whom migrated to Europe in various phases over different routes in the course of the last millennium or more. One of the routes was through Turkey and up into Austria, Germany, and points further west. The groups that took that route would, of course, by the time they got into Austria, be classified at the time as having arrived from Romania (at this point, it might be worth checking out a map). But other groups took other routes.

As for ultimate origins… well, the only theory that has some consensus is that everyone came out of Africa something like 150,000 years ago.

Irish Travellers (Irish: an lucht siúil) or Pavee, also called Tinkers or Gypsies (but not to be confused with the Romani people), are a traditionally itinerant people of ethnic Irish origin, who maintain a set of traditions[1][2] and a distinct ethnic identity. Although predominantly English speaking, some also use Shelta and other similar cants. They live mostly in Ireland as well as having large numbers in the United Kingdom and in the United States.[3] Around 10,000 people in the United States are descendants of Travellers who left Ireland, mostly during the period between 1845 and 1860 during the Great Famine.[4] About 2,500 of them live in Murphy Village, a community outside North Augusta, South Carolina.[5]

And then to confuse matters even more

Scottish Travellers, or the people termed loosely Gypsies and Tinkers in Scotland, consist of a number of diverse, unrelated communities, with groups speaking a variety of different languages and holding to distinct customs, histories, and traditions. There are three distinct communities that identify themselves as Gypsies or Travellers in Scotland: Indigenous Highland Travellers; Funfair Travellers, or Showmen; Romanichals (a subgroup of the Romani people) and Lowland Gypsies.

Peter wrote: "Fliss wrote: "Gypsies are not originally from Central Europe. They came out of India over 1000 years ago."

Not to put too fine a point on it, you're both wrong.

Nobody knows where "Gypsies" "orig..."

I am reading the Gypsies in Poland: History and customs by Jerzy Ficowski and it is mentioned in the book that in 1763 a Hungarian named Istvan Valyi discovered that when he came into contact with Indians in Europe he noticed that the language they were speaking was very similar to the language the Gypsies spoke and the Gypsies understood some of the words the Indians were using. A philological study was then carried out by J.C.C. Rudiger who confirmed Istavan Valyi's observations and many more cases were discovered that compared Gypsy words with Sanskrit and other Indian dialects. Other Philologists have also confirmed that there is a great deal of evidence that they did originate in India.

Geoffrey wrote: "Irish Travellers (Irish: an lucht siúil) or Pavee, also called Tinkers or Gypsies (but not to be confused with the Romani people), are a traditionally itinerant people of ethnic Irish origin, who m..."

Thanks Geoffrey. Interesting.

Didn't Heathcliff place a lock of his hair in Cathy's coffin? A Lock of his hair. He wasn't black. More likely a dark/swarthy skinned Caucasian with an appearance like a gypsy.

Romanian. I always believe he was of Eastern European origin myself. Explains the gypsy part.

I always imagined him as a mulatto, half northern European, half north African, for some reason...

It is mentioned a handful of times Heathcliff is dark shaded, moorish, with a gypsy appearence; his contrast when near milky white Cathy is reiterated. I beleive he must be an abandonned child left by a nomad or even a beggar.

Paul Martin wrote: "I always imagined him as a mulatto, half northern European, half north African, for some reason..."

We're driven to think he was a mulatto mostly because the only people who describe him in some detail are Nelly and Catherine and they always do it through a romanticised way. He could be as white and causasian as any average european, only a little more tanned due to time spent outdoors. We cannot assume much.

Cemre, I don't think criticizing carrie's spelling of gypsy is really beneficial to the discussion. It probably was a typo, get over it. And she basically said the same thing as you, so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to add at all. Some people on this thread get so butthurt if their opinions conflict with someone else's. This discussion should be pretty open and relative, based on a multitude of reader's responses and views, so we should accept other people's interpretations. That doesn't mean we can't disagree, but please let's be polite and not make passive aggressive, backhanded comments about them!

Whoops, sorry I didn't realize gipsy was another term for gypsy, I thought it was a misspelling. Sorry Cemre I thought you were making fun of her spelling, oops :(

Cemre wrote: "Actually Carrie, Lockwood likens him to a "dark skinned gypsy" in the first chapter and Lintons don't let him come into their house because of his dark skin. Actually Lintons even have some sugesst..."

Okay, granted.

It's been ages since I read the book but so far there has been no speculation that H was the illegitimate son of his benefactor.

Josh wrote: "Cemre, I don't think criticizing carrie's spelling of gypsy is really beneficial to the discussion. It probably was a typo, get over it. And she basically said the same thing as you, so I'm not qui..."

Thank you Josh, you were very kind. Yes, I do often commit mispelling mistakes. That is probably a side effect of learning English, Spanish and French all by myself, using the best of my selfdidatic skills. However, sometimes it is simply not enough. So, again, thank you!

Geoffrey wrote: "It's been ages since I read the book but so far there has been no speculation that H was the illegitimate son of his benefactor."

Yes, it is mightly possible, given the Earnshaw patriarch wasn't particularly portraited as a person driven to charity and altruism. One fine day he simple shows off with a boy under his arm out of the blue...?

Cemre wrote: "Actually Carrie, Lockwood likens him to a "dark skinned gypsy" in the first chapter and Lintons don't let him come into their house because of his dark skin. Actually Lintons even have some sugesst..."

Indeed, also because the Lintons are far more given to Literature, History and even Geography studies than the Earnshaws, therefore they have such great references to support their opinions and speculations about where Heathcliff could be from.

Yeah, I had no idea that gypsy and gipsy were both the same words, but I guess you learn new vocabulary words all the time!