An argument from the dictionary, in about four lectures (1167, 1194, 1224, 1399). English is the most liquid and richest tongue in the world, has borrowed from every other and has the largest vocabulary - and to express rejoicing in the good fortune of another it has one little word, empathy, which nobody uses. Say I sympathize, I have compassion for you, I pity you, and there are hundreds of words. Neville's conclusion is not about language: the word is not in use because the emotion is not in use - no one rejoices, really rejoices, in the good fortune of another, they're envious. The test case is the neighbourhood, and he runs it both ways: let a next-door neighbour have an injury and the whole neighbourhood rushes in to sympathize; let it be known that she has come into a fortune and it is why should she get it, I know what she's done in the past, where is the justice in this world? At 1399 the same point is put through a daily double won on a two-dollar bet - no one thinks of the joy in that household, they think why didn't I make it - and given its scriptural anchor: Job rejoiced in the good fortune of his friends, and as he did so his own captivity was lifted. So the motif is a diagnostic, and the cure is named with it. Companion to M1073 on the envious bar. PROVENANCE. Coined out of sequence at the request of the attach lane, which found the passages while attaching other motifs and reported that nothing in the catalogue held them. The canonical and the occurrences below were read in full before coining; the rest of the corpus-wide set was supplied by the lane and is attached, not read, so the occurrences here carry confidence 0.95 rather than 0.99.