# The English Language - Marked for Death?



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Not to get all Strunk & White or William Safire-esque on you folks, but there are certain popular usages that make me absolutely berserk.

In no particular order:

"Back in the day" - Only an octogenarian blues singer should be allowed to employ this. I used to get 19 year old clients at the drug rehab who used this phrase, to which there could be only reply -"What day? The eighth grade graduation?"

"Yo" - Is there a sudden abundance of Spanish-speaking egomaniacs around here?

"...Floyd scores, and the Mets are within two" - Say the score is 4-2. The announcer will say something like this, but it is inaccurate. The Mets, in this case, are _*exactly*_ two runs behind. If they were "within two," the score would be 4-2 1/2.

"Bro" - Shut up. How about "sir"?

Grrr.

There are enough well-spoken types here - surely you have dozens of pet language peeves.

Selah,

Patrick


----------



## winn (Dec 31, 2005)

_"surely you have dozens of pet language peeves."_ (Patrick, 6 August 2005)

"have a good one" (end of transaction with salesperson to me) I really want to say in return - "have a good ..what?" This "one" irks me to no end.

"any word + the suffix -wise". I think the only acceptable ones are "otherwise" and "likewise".

and in my professional life...
"handicapped parking space", "handicapped toilet" etc. Look, toilets and parking spaces aren't handicapped. Some people have handicaps. Parking spaces and toilets can be made "barrier-free".
A younger guy at work asked me about this a few days ago, and I went off on my rant on this issue for five to ten minutes - more than what he wanted. There was applause from the entire (small) office afterwards at my performance.

"prioritize". I cringe every time I hear this one. Am I alone?

I appreciate you, Patrick.

Cheers,
Winn


----------



## SeaPlusPlus (Feb 11, 2003)

Winn:



> quote:"any word + the suffix -wise". I think the only acceptable ones are "otherwise" and "likewise".


any word + the suffix -esque ! ! !

I think they're all unacceptable because they're very "Drama Queen-esque"... as in "William Safire-esque"... 

Seriously, though, I can't stand the use of the word ...nowhamsayin... they'll usually preface it with ...dongotnone... ...nowhamsayin...

nowhatmsayin??? [8D]

If they say "back in the day"... I usually ask them if they have registered for the draft yet... they look at me as if to say... "what the hell are you talking about????"

.............clueless................

I say clueless because they don't know if they've registered or not... [V]

Rich

Do the clothes suit you?
Do the clothes suit the occasion?
Do the clothes suit each other?


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

An argument raged at the paper the other day - how to refer to amputees?

I said "How about 'amputees'?" but was ignored.

So while they stumbled around with "limb-challenged" etc. I reached back to the pre-Monty Python comedy troupe Beyond the Fringe to come up with "unidexter" and "monoped".

The pregnant silence. The glare from the copy editor.

"Just trying to help you out..."

(Be careful with euphemism.)


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

I don't care for the Copesque turn our language has taken:

1. The gentleman proceeded to stab him in the heart
2. I'm taking my vehicle to the store

I also don't care for how my children are being taught to refer to the bathroom or toilet as the rest room.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Patrick06790_
> 
> An argument raged at the paper the other day - how to refer to amputees?
> 
> ...


I once worked with a copy editor who hung a sign over desk asking: "Is anal-retentive hyphenated?"

One reason the language is getting out of whack is that dictionaries are ruled by current usage, however little sense it makes. A man named Kenn Finkel, a patron saint of copy editors who now goes around the country giving seminars, calls dictionaries "the lowest common denominator."

I remember having an argument with a copy editor 15 years ago because of her insistence that "I could care less" was acceptable because it was in a dictionary, even though common sense would tell us that "I could _not_ care less" makes a whole lot more sense because we are trying to indicate that we care as little as possible.

Very recently I pointed out to a writer that people do not "run amuck," they "run amok." He said "amuck" was in the dictionary -- and damned if it isn't, as a "variation" of "amok."

So if dictionaries will accept any kind of illiteracy, the language is indeed doomed.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I read Beowulf in saxon. I was suprised and pleased to understand it! I just picked up Ireland's literary Darling Seamus Heaney's new rendering, and thats what it is, with less grace than a sword's blow. My last lifeboat crew consisted of Tsui Tuitasi- Samoan, Nigel Oliphaunt- late of her Majesty's Constabulary and George Washington Carver Kingston from Macon Georgia. NOBODY could understand our intimate patois after a few months. The base CPO,another cracker with a Rod Steiger persona would get on the radio and demand G.W. come topside from his engines and translate[:I] We still managed to enjoy a few Shakespear plays together, though Tui was outraged a Moor would marry a Haole girl and break tapu. I know I have my own linguistic sins to account for. I hope to refresh my skills. If anyone wishs to correct me the criticisms are welcomed. Just remember to press 1 for english and not 2 for spanish or 3 if you need an operator's assistance.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:The gentleman proceeded to stab him in the heart


As a gentleman, heart-stabbing is my sacred right [}]

'A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.' - Wilde

Though certainly that phrase should not be written about, say, a _blackguard_ who proceeded to stab him in the heart (or, more likely of a blackguard, between the shoulder-blades).



> quote:One reason the language is getting out of whack is that dictionaries are ruled by current usage, however little sense it makes.


This is why I exclusively use the 1933 edition of the _Oxford English Dictionary_, and have absolutely no plans to ever move to anything more current.


----------



## kronos77 (Jan 22, 2006)

""Yo" - Is there a sudden abundance of Spanish-speaking egomaniacs around here?"

Sorry, but I was born and raised in Philadelphia where the word "YO!" was coined as a greeting; first among the Italian immigrants and very soon by all the ethnic groups. I find it perfectly acceptable in Philadlephia, among other native born Philadelphians.

What I don't like is the way it is misused by outsiders and little kids who have no idea what it means or how to use it.


----------



## winn (Dec 31, 2005)

_"Sorry, but I was born and raised in Philadelphia where the word "YO!" was coined as a greeting; first among the Italian immigrants and very soon by all the ethnic groups. I find it perfectly acceptable in Philadelphia, among other native born Philadelphians."_ (Kronos77, 22 January 2006)

The immediate image that came to my mind as I read this was the original Rocky motion picture with Sylvester Stallone saying "Yo, Adrian..."

Cheers,
Winn


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I'm irritated by football coaches and other football professionals who insist on using the word "football" before the word game or team no matter what. To me it sounds stilted to say we have to win this "football" game. 

What are the Broncos and Steelers playing, hopscotch???


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by forsbergacct2000_
> 
> I'm irritated by football coaches and other football professionals who insist on using the word "football" before the word game or team no matter what. To me it sounds stilted to say we have to win this "football" game.
> 
> What are the Broncos and Steelers playing, hopscotch???


They do it to annoy non-Americans.


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by forsbergacct2000_
> 
> I'm irritated by football coaches and other football professionals who insist on using the word "football" before the word game or team no matter what. To me it sounds stilted to say we have to win this "football" game.
> 
> What are the Broncos and Steelers playing, hopscotch???


Bill Cowher was just doing that. "I'm very proud of this football team. We came in here and won this football game against a very good football team but our football team was the better football team and I am proud to be the football coach of this football team after winning this football game..."

Gack.


----------



## Frank aka The Minotaur (Nov 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by kronos77_
> 
> ""Yo" - Is there a sudden abundance of Spanish-speaking egomaniacs around here?"
> 
> ...


There is documentation among linguists that the speech of Philadelphia and the surrounding area is rapidly going its own way with respect to the English dialect of the area.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Oh my God, Patrick, that sounds like an egregious case!!

Did Cowher really use the word "football" that many times? 

(I know you are a newspaper reporter and are used to getting quotes! I certainly don't want to impugn your professionalism. By the way, I would enjoy reading more samples of your work if you have time to post them. I really like your writing.)

When they talk like that it just sounds so self-important and self-involved, at least to me.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

Funny - we continental Europeans, who are supposed to be conservative about our languages, are always being told how wonderfully flexible the English language is, and how receptive it is to change. American English is often held up as a shining example of a dynamic, living language always ready to take on new usage and evolve, unbounded by petty rules and pedantry... It's even said that this makes it an ideal international language because English "doesn't need to be correct", and "the Americans and the British don't learn grammar at school" so wouldn't know what was "correct" anyway. This is strengthened by the fact that young Europeans who strive to speak English by the book often surprise their American counterparts, who find their English "too good". There's an idea about that American English is somehow "democratic" in that no-one will mind if you speak badly because "there's no official standard". This belief appeals to many European youngsters who learn a lot of their English from listening to American rap, which they prefer to "school English".


----------



## Vettriano Man (Jun 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> This is why I exclusively use the 1933 edition of the _Oxford English Dictionary_, and have absolutely no plans to ever move to anything more current.


 You beat me by four years, old bean, since I always have the Little Oxford Dictionary - Second Edition 1937 - beside me at all times. Well, most of the time. You know.

A pet hate of mine is constantly being asked when browsing in shops and stores 'You alright?", (and worse "Alright mate?"), to which I have been known to answer "Oh, do I look I'll or something" and the assistants look most puzzled. What is wrong with "Are you happy to browse, Sir?"

The other hideous one is *'cool'*. Why does everything have to be 'cool' these days?
In my book food and drink are kept 'cool' in a refridgerator and in warm weather a fan keeps me 'cool', so how does one dress 'cool' for instance?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Watch a lot of eminem videos???

Sorry, Vettriano Man, you deserved far better than that!! (I just could not resist.) 

(Also, I seriously do not recommend eminem videos for sartorial advice!)

I agree with you about the dictionary. The only place you might get in a bit of trouble is with technological jargon. Certainly for the most formal letter writing etc. that style would be the best.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by forsbergacct2000_
> 
> Oh my God, Patrick, that sounds like an egregious case!!
> 
> ...


I was exaggerating just a tad.

My epics can be found at www.tcextra.com (front page or click on Sharon, Kent and sports).


----------



## Badrabbit (Nov 18, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by forsbergacct2000_
> 
> I'm irritated by football coaches and other football professionals who insist on using the word "football" before the word game or team no matter what. To me it sounds stilted to say we have to win this "football" game.
> 
> What are the Broncos and Steelers playing, hopscotch???


I hate a similar thing that golf announcers do. Namely,"That was a great golf shot", as if we weren't going to be able to tell that Tiger was playing golf and not shooting three pointers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women thrive on novelty and are easy meat for the commerce of fashion. Men prefer old pipes and torn jackets. 
Anthony Burgess


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Thank you for the link, Patrick. When I'm not working, I will read some of these!


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

If it had been left to our generation to name chairs and flashlights, we would have personal seating devices and personal illumination devices. Worse yet, we would refer to them as PSDs and PIDs.


----------



## ashie259 (Aug 25, 2005)

I was in a restaraunt (in London) the other day and the waiter, upon serving Mrs ashie259 and I with our starters, said "Enjoy, guys!"

Where do I start?


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by ashie259_
> 
> I was in a restaraunt (in London) the other day and the waiter, upon serving Mrs ashie259 and I with our starters, said "Enjoy, guys!"
> 
> Where do I start?


Did you slay him with sword or battle-axe?


----------



## android (Dec 8, 2004)

My favorite stupidity used by local newspaper and radio news goes something like this....

"A blue Ford Bronco drove off the rode and struck a tree."

Boy, I'm glad nobody was driving, that would have hurt.


----------



## SeaPlusPlus (Feb 11, 2003)

Patrick:



> quote:Bill Cowher was just doing that. "I'm very proud of this football team. We came in here and won this football game against a very good football team but our football team was the better football team and I am proud to be the football coach of this football team after winning this football game..."


Bill was simply keeping things clean for the cameras and substituting 'football' for the OTHER 'f-word'... read it with the other word and you'll see the way these sentiments are expressed in the 3rd millenium... 

Gives a new meaning to Gamecocks and Trojans football score... [:I]

Rich

Do the clothes suit you?
Do the clothes suit the occasion?
Do the clothes suit each other?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

That's an amusing take, but I think most football professionals who talk this way are just way too pompous and way too self-important.


----------



## winn (Dec 31, 2005)

I have finally thought of a response to:
"Have a good one"
I will respond:
"Have a good one...too" (biting my tongue so as not to continue counting aloud)

Cheers,
Winn


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

When I ask, "How are you?" and someone responds, "I'm doing good," my inclination is to say, "Ah, you've been making charitable donations and keeping busy with volunteer work, how nice."


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

The dictionary to which I turn first is the 1927 edition of _The New Century Dictionary of the English Language_. My first copy originally belonged to my grandfather. I have gotten two more, one for the place at the lake and another to keep in my studio. For a back up I have a rebound 1958 edition of _Websters' New World Dictionary, College Edition._

I confess to using cool, and other hipster jargon, probably to bolster the notion that I am in some way bohemian. But I am 60 and not only can I wear what I want (today it was a tweed suit and very nice English shoes), I can talk as I wish.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

American English is an amazing, multi-faceted language. It can be used casually or formally, depending on the occasion and the user. No other language that I am aware of has its depth and flexibility, its openness to subtle shadings and tweaks. 

Part of it is reflection of American culture, where a diplomat can go from a carefully calculated statement to an irreverant aside. We're so lucky to have it as a mother tongue.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by xcubbies_
> 
> American English is an amazing, multi-faceted language. It can be used casually or formally, depending on the occasion and the user. No other language that I am aware of has its depth and flexibility, its openness to subtle shadings and tweaks.
> 
> Part of it is reflection of American culture, where a diplomat can go from a carefully calculated statement to an irreverant aside. We're so lucky to have it as a mother tongue.


I think you can do that in any language if you have a mind to. Proficiency in such code switching is a social skill (and a literary skill) that is appreciated in the US, for cultural reasons, as you say. It is not specific to the American language. Arabic is highly flexible - you can go from classical Arabic to local dialect with all the intermediate shades in the same conversation. In French-influenced North Africa you can switch between French and Arabic and back again in the same sentence to add a nuance. In many polyglot parts of the world, languages mingle and produce highly complex systems with the finest shades of meaning and connotation - this is the case in African cities. It may be true to say that American English, among the great world languages, is relatively unrestricted by academic prescriptive standards of language use - less so that British English and other main European languages as practiced in Europe. However, the French spoken in Africa, and the Spanish spoken in Mexico are less corseted - again for social and cultural reasons.


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Rich, I don't know Arabic, but as for French and Spanish, I really don't think they can compare for malleability. Mexican Spanish can be extremely colorful, but it has fairly clear perimeters. French has its bon mots, but I continue to be amazed by its formality, even with its argot. I recently had to have a document I wrote, of about 10,000 words translated officially into French. It was nearly 25% longer. Similarly, reading the subtitles of an American film, French just doesn't have freedom of scope that English does. 

I conceed that Americans, more isolated, cannot throw in a foreign term as one might find in other cultures. And I don't defend our resistance to learning new languages, though that seems to be changing.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by xcubbies_
> 
> Rich, I don't know Arabic, but as for French and Spanish, I really don't think they can compare for malleability. Mexican Spanish can be extremely colorful, but it has fairly clear perimeters. French has its bon mots, but I continue to be amazed by its formality, even with its argot. I recently had to have a document I wrote, of about 10,000 words translated officially into French. It was nearly 25% longer. Similarly, reading the subtitles of an American film, French just doesn't have freedom of scope that English does.
> 
> I conceed that Americans, more isolated, cannot throw in a foreign term as one might find in other cultures. And I don't defend our resistance to learning new languages, though that seems to be changing.


It's not that French doesn't inherently have the freedom of scope. The problem is, if it is a problem, that French speakers are unwilling to use the full resources of the language in certain situations, which socially call for greater formality. It's the French who more formal than the Americans in most situations, not their (spoken) language. However, watch a French film like Mathieu Kassovitz's _La Haine_ and you will see that modern grass-roots spoken French can be every bit as resourceful as English.

Subtitling an American action film is very difficult because a lot of what has to be translated is not normally ever written in French! Dubbing is possible, however (the Godfather has been very well dubbed).

I agree that the resources of American English are used very freely and inventively by Americans. There is resistance to this in French, because the French are conservative in this respect. The very homogeneous, classical and timeless structures of prescribed French, together with its typographic qualities (it has been said that French is a language meant to be read), is greatly prized in France. Formality is not generally prized in the US, rather the opposite - this is a cultural feature of America and Americans.

Incidentally, French translations from English are normally on average 10% longer - 25% seems excessive to me. This extra 10% is due to technical features of the language and how it is segmented. Translate English into German and the word count goes down, for the same reason, not because Greman is somehow inherently more concise.

A language in use reflects its users - Americans bold and inventive, disdainful of rules and precedent, the French conservative, respectful of ancient historical tradition, etc. I wonder what would have happened if German, as was so nearly the case, had become the official language of the USA?


----------



## rws (May 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by rojo_
> When I ask, "How are you?" and someone responds, "I'm doing good," my inclination is to say, "Ah, you've been making charitable donations and keeping busy with volunteer work, how nice."


_Good_ for you, rojo!

Late one night in the law-school library, a pretty but ill-educated classmate replied to my asking how she was, that she was "good". Before I could think, my tongue responded, "But not modest."

Fortunately, the response merely confused her.


----------



## Wimsey (Jan 28, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> 
> A language in use reflects its users - Americans bold and inventive, disdainful of rules and precedent, the French conservative, respectful of ancient historical tradition, etc. I wonder what would have happened if German, as was so nearly the case, had become the official language of the USA?


Well, first, German didn't almost become the official language of the US - that is a widespread belief, and I think I had a HS teacher who told it to me as well - but it's false. https://www.snopes.com/language/apocryph/german.htm

Second, the idea that the language one speaks affects one's behavior (technically known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-whorf) is also generally discredited.

There are very interesting cultural differences between the French and the English and the Americans, of course - but these differences are generally not broadly reflected in the language (except to the extent that you need words to describe cultural features, of course) nor are these cultural differences caused by the language. The cultural differences are caused by being French and not American, or vice versa, not by speaking French or American English.


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by xcubbies_
> 
> Rich, I don't know Arabic, but as for French and Spanish, I really don't think they can compare for malleability. Mexican Spanish can be extremely colorful, but it has fairly clear perimeters. French has its bon mots, but I continue to be amazed by its formality, even with its argot. I recently had to have a document I wrote, of about 10,000 words translated officially into French. It was nearly 25% longer. Similarly, reading the subtitles of an American film, French just doesn't have freedom of scope that English does.
> 
> I conceed that Americans, more isolated, cannot throw in a foreign term as one might find in other cultures. And I don't defend our resistance to learning new languages, though that seems to be changing.


We frequently throw foreign terms into our language: the aforementioned word, "amok", is a Malay word, for example, and anyone who has spent much time in New York, is aware of "NewYoRican", which moves readily back and forth between Engish and Spanish, sometimes within the same word.

Each generation seems to decry the imminent death of the English language and, most certainly, some twigs of the tree bend a bit strangely; one needs, however, only to remember that the roots of the tree are Shakespeare, Johnson, Jefferson and Lincoln, to mention only a very few, to feel comfortable in the ultimate immortality of the language.

Esse Quam Videre


----------



## Mahler (Aug 5, 2005)

Ok, so I'm a linguist and I have to admit most of what I read in this tread is utter BS.

Don't get me wrong, even a most anti-prescriptivist linguist will cringe at some expressions/examples of usage, but to claim that "English is going out of whack" or to say English is special in any sense is nothing but unwarranted prejudice. Xcubbies is absolutely right on the first issue, and other languages (ca. 7000 of them) are just as multi-faceted and complex as English: what they may simplify in one part of the grammar they make up for elsewhere. Try learning verbal morphology of Guarani or of virtually any Native American language and you'll see English is pre-school compared to that.

Yes, the speech of Philadelphia is undergoing a very complex set of changes whose description would take volumes. If you'd like to find out more, register to see a demo version of the magnificent Atlas of North American English:

Further, I recommend reading a blog www.languagelog.com where a group of linguists has been humorously and convincingly dispelling some language myths that this thread is perpetuating.


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by ashie259_
> 
> I was in a restaurant (in London) the other day and the waiter, upon serving Mrs ashie259 and I with our starters, said "Enjoy, guys!"
> 
> Where do I start?


I would assume this is merely an example of American usages influencing the British. That sort of usage has been fairly prevalent in informal American speech for at least 25 years or so. I've been told that it was common in the Pacific Northwest for quite some time before that, but Mahler may be able to shed more light on that.


----------

