New rule #24
We should all endeavor to speak and write English properly and require those in
the public arena to help us by doing the same .
"Please keep your seatbelts
fastened until the plane comes to a full and complete stop." In the context of a stop, "full" is
"complete" and vice versa; why say both? Does it make for more emphasis? do we say "complete"
just in case you missed "full?"
"We'd like to thank each and every one of you for flying ____
airlines." I submit that by thanking "each" of us, you will be
forced to thank "every one" of
us whether you want to or not. You might
thank every other one of us, but that voids the "each" part. Most difficult to grasp of all, however was
the "Pre-boarding." If no one
is on the plane, we're all "pre-boarding." Once anyone enters the aircraft, we've begun
the boarding process, and we ain't "pre" any longer. Some may board
before others, but we're all gonna get on. I can't take credit for this one, because the
late, great George Carlin riffed on it 30 years ago.
Another troubling phrase is "X
% (larger, more, stronger) ." In
many cases, there is no comparator given, so we're left to ponder "So,
they're saying this new Clorox is 40% stronger than (water? lye? jeweler's
rouge? snot?) ?? One of the real scams enabled
by our attraction to "bigger is better" is the case recently seen in
the aisles of Walmart where the price per ounce of a condiment was actually higher
in the large "economy" size, probably because the container was more user friendly. There
was no economy of scale, but the label implied otherwise.
Another pet peeve is the continued dumbing down of language by
misspelling or misusing common words,
apparently on the assumption that we won't understand them if spelled
correctly. "Donut" is ubiquitous, yet many of us actually understand
the meaning of its apparently archaic spelling "doughnut." Interestingly enough, most have no nuts anyway
and probably should be renamed "fried dough thingies." "Ten items or less" is a prime
example of misapplied simple English words. "Ten items or fewer" is correct. You can ask for less milk, but not
fewer milk. No one has ever said "I wish I weighed fewer."
" I could care less" may be the most widespread diametric contradiction of all. Clearly if
one could "care less," then they do in fact, care, voiding the intent
of the malapropism. In like manner. A favorite of the advertising industry is
the (non) "word" -"crispy." It is always seen in usage as
an adjective, yet it is already an adjective as "crisp." The
"y" transforms it into some other dimension apparently halfway
between adjective and adverb. If "crispy" can describe an aspect of chicken,
then so can "hoty, overcookedy, rawy, sicky and deady!" "Should of " belongs in here
somewhere too, as it is a widely used misapplication of the intent of
"should have."
The
other interesting and supremely annoying
peeve is that apparently, some
words can be made more impressive and/or authoritative by intentional or
archaic misspelling. Examples I have seen
include: olde, shoppe, wylde, kave, kool, nite, lite, tite, rite (the
adjective, not the ritual), kwik, pak.
One common phenomenon is the insertion of a "u" in certain words
(behaviour, colour, valour) apparently
in an attempt to show sophistication. If you aren't English, you didn't learn it that way in school, so
stop it! Many of our children were
attended at some time by a pediatrician, and it seemed to work fine, but now I
occasionally see advertisements for Paediatricians, and Orthopaedics; are they
better?
Teachers frequently lament diminishing
language skills, in today's students,
but how should it be otherwise when we are constantly bombarded with these bastardizations of our
native tongue. How can I expect a new language learner to speak properly when
they hear such egregious examples of mangled
speech? Lemme me axe u dat!
No comments:
Post a Comment