Posted on 01/19/2018 7:47:16 AM PST by Salvation
We all have certain phrases that annoy us; oddities creep into the language that invite comment or could use correction. To that end, I propose below a list of ten annoying and/or misused words and expressions.
Please accept this list in the humorous vein in which it is intended. I am playing the role of an irritated curmudgeon, but it’s just my shtick. Have some fun with me as I complain and then feel free to add to my list.
So, can we talk? He’s my list of annoyances.
1. “With all due respect …” – This phrase is typically followed by something that isn’t going to respect the recipient at all! When you open an e-mail and it begins, “With all due respect, Mr. Jones, …,” don’t you just wince at what you just know is coming? In a way, the expression is a form of lip service. It’s a way of saying, “I want to dispense with that silly tradition of having to accord you a modicum of respect and get on to what’s really on my mind, namely, that you’re wrong and probably clueless as well.”
2. Decimate – Today the word has come to mean “to destroy completely.” For example, “Our culture has been decimated by no-fault divorce.” The original meaning, to reduce something by a tenth, has been relegated to a secondary definition in many dictionaries. The word came from the Roman practice in which, after conquering a town that was guilty of some sort of uprising, the Romans would line up all the men of that town in the public square, and kill every tenth one. In effect, the message was, “This is what you get if you mess with us. It’ll be worse next time.” Alas, trying to recover the original meaning of this word may be a lost cause at this point. It may be destined to go the way of other Latin-based words such as “manufacture,” the literal meaning of which is handmade (manu = hand, facere = to make). Today something referred to as manufactured is typically not handmade. There are other English words that seem to have reversed meanings. For example, we drive on parkways and park on driveways.
3. Service – There is a tendency today to take the noun “service” and turn it into a verb. It is common to hear someone say, “We service our clients.” or, “We serviced fifty people last month.” No! People are served, not serviced. Perhaps you may speak of a car as being serviced, but people are served. It’s hard to know where this manner of speaking came from, but I suspect it crept in from the world of prostitution, where prostitutes often speak of “servicing” their “Johns” (i.e. clients). We do not service people, we serve them; people are not serviced they are served.
4. Not unlike – This strange expression, in a way, cancels itself out as a double negative. For example, someone may say, “This car is not unlike that one.” If you put a few of those sorts of expressions into a sentence, trying to figure out exactly what the sentence means can make your head explode. In fact, it strains the meaning of the word “sentence,” which refers to a string of words that makes sense. Unless the person misspoke, this seems to just be a fancy way of saying, “This car is like that one.” Try to avoid making heads explode by not using the expression, “not unlike.”
5. Proactive – This is another strange word that has crept into our vocabulary. How is “proactive” different from active? One might argue that there’s a temporal dimension here: one who is “proactive” is one who is ahead of his time. To be honest, I’m not sure what is meant when someone is called “a proactive person.” I think it is a compliment, in that the person is “ahead of the curve” or something, but it’s just not all that clear to me — but maybe I’m just being reactive.
6. Utilize – Why not just say “use”? This oddity seems to be waning in usage, and not a moment too soon as far as I’m concerned. I live for the day when we no longer use “utilize” things.
7. Intellectually dishonest – How is being “intellectually dishonest” different from being just plain dishonest? Is not honesty or dishonesty rooted in the intellect and manifested in speech? I’ve never heard other qualifiers attached; I haven’t heard of physical dishonesty or verbal dishonesty. “You’re being intellectually dishonest” seems to me to be just a highfalutin’ way of saying “You’re being dishonest.”
8. Dialogue – Why not just say “discussion”? Instead of saying, “I’m having a dialogue with him,” why not just say, “I’m having a discussion with him”? An even more egregious abuse of this word is to “verbify” it: “Let’s dialogue about this problem.” Why not just say, “Let’s discuss this problem?” Even worse is “We’re dialoguing about this issue” instead of “We’re discussing this issue.” Turning nouns into verbs or verb forms generally produces strange results. To quote a classic line from Calvin and Hobbes, “Your verbing is weirding me out.” So, let’s talk; let’s have a discussion, but let’s limit our usage of the noun “dialogue” and certainly avoid using it as a verb or using the strange construction “dialoguing.”
9. Using “so” as an interjection – I have seen this most often in academic settings. Typically, the word “so” tends to be placed at the beginning of the answer to a question. For example, “What do the data show in relation to this problem?” The response might be, “So … the data seem to indicate that things are going to get worse.” (People sometimes use an interjection as a delaying tactic while feverishly formulating an answer in their head, but that’s not the usage to which I’m objecting.) In this case, though, I’m suspicious that it is emblematic of the relativistic climate that pervades today’s academic settings. The interjection “So …,” expressed gently and slowly, seems rather more designed to make the person seem thoughtful and somehow not arrogantly certain of what he is about to say. So … I don’t want to come off is too nasty, but would you please stop saying “so” all the time?
10. “Are you suggesting …?” – This is a preamble to a question and is often used by members of the mainstream media to indicate incredulity at an outlandish statement or position. A reporter writing a piece on the Catholic Church might ask me, “Are you suggesting that people who don’t follow the teachings of the Church are in error?” There’s a part of me that wants to answer, “I’m not suggesting anything; I’m saying it outright!” Here, too, the relativistic climate rears its head. People don’t say things or claim things; they “suggest” them. Let me be clear: as one not heavily influenced by relativism, I can say that when I am asked a question, I state an answer. I do not “suggest” an answer—and neither should you, at least when it comes to faith or morals. Do not suggest the faith, say it. Say what you mean and mean what you say, but don’t say it mean.
OK, can we talk? This is my short list; what do you want to add?
[but what you perceive is not necessarily reality]
Exactly.
In decades, I never have met a “perception is reality” guy who wasn’t sporting a $30+ haircut, pressed shirts, manicured and who wasn’t as trustworthy as Barack Hussein Obama.
Which is exactly why that clown never passed the smell test to me 24 hours after seeing him in action and looking even 1/4” beneath the surface.
Yes, a guy can get a real abuttful of that kind of nonsense.
lol
physical dishonesty....
That’s when you lie about your physical description on an online dating site :)
Definitely a non-orthodox use of those words.
Against the First Commandment.
You nailed it! It’s invariably said with that tone, as well. The tsk-tsk, what can you do, tone...
“You know what I’m saying,” after every sentence (but usually sloppily pronounced “Nome Sane”) ... GRRRR.
Baby momma or baby daddy!
Don’t forget “your” for “you’re”.
I once saw “literally” misused in a different way: there was nothing figurative about it.
It was something like “She literally washed those clothes until they were clean.”
“Alright” and “alot” are not becoming okay, but there are plenty of other things that are.
I am annotating a 1977 usage book for someone who wants to become a proofreader, and there are many, many updates needed. Scores of words and phrases that were proscribed in 1977 have become colloquial and acceptable.
Originally, “...toe the line...”, to stand with one’s toe on the starting or boundary line, therefore to follow the rules, to stay within the defined limits. Also, in old bare-knuckle prize-fighting, after one is knocked down, to stand up and indicate one is ready to go on by standing with one’s toe on a line drawn across the ring, to “come to scratch.”
Is it the turn of the twentieth century in 2001, or the turn of the twenty-first century? Or doesn’t it matter? I’ve never been able to find a definitive answer to this.
I find it annoying when someone says “yes” and then immediately follows it with “no”.
It’s a fancy term for “normal,” so that we can’t use “normal” anymore.
I can’t stand the word “empowered”.
I can’t stand the phrase “I see what you did there”.
I hate anyone who uses the non-word “prolly” as a lazy way of saying “probably”.
I can’t stand the word “Latina”, and now I am starting to see the word “Muslima” which is even worse.
“......then something went terribly wrong.”
Twenty-first century.
The only way I can remember is with Christ who lived in the first Christian century, years 30-33 were his ministry period.
I can’t stand people who speak in a perfectly normal American accent, and then when encountering a Spanish word or name, switch into a phony exaggerated Hispanic accent, and then go back to their normal speech patterns once they get past the Spanish words.
I hate it when black people who are perfectly capable of speaking standard English switch into Ebonics when addressing other blacks (e.g. Barack Obama).
Even worse is when white people switch into Ebonics when addressing blacks (e.g. Hillary Clinton).
And adding the helping verb
“I have seen ...”
rather than “I seen...”
“......then something went terribly wrong.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.