Fortuitous, Orientate and Methodology

fortuitous. 'Fortuitous' means adventitious, that is, by chance, not by design. It does not mean 'fortunate'.  But that is what many people use it for, thinking it sounds more impressive. That it does not mean merely 'fortunate' is evident from the fact that 'not fortuitous' means 'not a mere matter of chance', whereas 'not fortunate' means 'unfortunate', i.e., lacking in good fortune. Thus we can say 'His getting a rotten oyster was merely fortuitous' - meaning only that it was bad luck, that no one was trying to poison him or anything like that - but we can't make the same point by saying 'His getting a rotten oyster was merely fortunate'.  Ernst Cassirer provides a literary illustration.  Of earlier cultures, for whom immortality, not mortality, is the default position, he writes of their thoughts towards death: ‘It always depends upon individual and fortuitous causes’ (An Essay on Man, p. 83).

At least, that's what I say, contrary to Webster's. I suppose people have thought: chance, therefore luck, which usually means good luck, which is fortunate. Here is a example of the misuse I have in mind:

Benitez's career hit the skids in 2003, when, despite being an All-Star, he was traded by both New York teams and ultimately landed in Seattle. He signed a free-agent deal with Florida last season and set a team mark with 47 saves. His comfort in Florida and a fortuitous pairing with pitching coach Wayne Rosenthal were thought to be the reasons behind his success.

Clearly the writer means that the pairing was an occasion of good fortune, not just that it happened by chance.

A correct use by Quine (!), writing on grammar (!): 

Taking 'lane' steadfastly as a string of phonemes, what are we to say  of the fortuitous occurrence of 'lane' in 'plane'? No other word is interchangeable with 'lane' salva congruitate when such fortuitous occurrences are counted in. 

orientate. Why say 'orientate' or 'orientated' rather than 'orient' or 'oriented'?

methodology.  A methodology is a science or theory of method. It is not itself a method. But everywhere you hear people speaking of a methodology when they mean a method. I suppose this is half-forgivable, since for most things we have some thought behind our method. But not always! A man might have a method of tying a fly. or shooting free-throws, without having a methodology - he might just do it that way, without having a theory about it.