|
Post by sasha on Aug 16, 2021 16:07:08 GMT -5
Language evolves, just as organisms do. I never could have managed Shakespeare or Chaucer without the footnotes. Even the slang of my youth sounds weirdly out of place (and a bit grating) when I hear it on old tv shows of the era: "Groovy, baby! Outta sight!"
I know and accept that English will continue to change under my feet with or without my approval - but there are some neologisms that just get under my skin. For some reason, "woke", "cancel culture", and the re-purposing of "optics" set my teeth on edge - probably because I first heard them used by certain public figures I hold in high disregard, and whose literary proficiency I call into question. But as these terms migrate into the mainstream they're becoming a little less offensive and inscrutable, reminding me that the language will live on, thrive even, long after I have ceased to.
But I cannot, will not, embrace "webinar". I despise that term. Such a stilted, self-conscious, clumsy portmanteau! A Frankensteinish hammering together of "web" and "seminar"! Maybe it's because the few I've been coerced into attending have all played out as comic operas of technical glitches, Powerpoint slides stating either the blindingly obvious or the current platitudes of corporate culture, and generally lacking any kind of useful content.
Webinar. Call me square, Daddy-o, but I just don't dig, ya hip?
Please share your own linguistic peeves below. Please. Please let me know I'm not just some cranky old geezer yelling at the neighborhood kids to get off his lawn, and waxing nostalgic about the real music of the 1960s, not the trash being vomited out today......
|
|
volkov
New Member
AC Veteran
Posts: 16
|
Post by volkov on Aug 16, 2021 19:36:19 GMT -5
Well, there are some minor annoyances, like the admonishments to "stay in your lane" and other pieces of advice by "social justice warriors", but for me, the biggest language peeve I have is the near constant misuse of science terms.
The biggest offender is people misusing the word "energy". Every time I hear someone use the word "energy" in a context that is not either actually talking about physics or some other actual physical phenomenon like electricity, I want to bang my head against the wall. Examples would be stuff like "this room has good energy" or "you need to project a calming energy", basically a mystical view where energy is equivalent to magic. Think Deepak Chopra, that dude has made an embarrassingly lavish living out of misusing the word energy.
The second biggest offender would be the misuse of the word "theory". As in, "Oh, evolution is just a theory". I just want to grind my teeth every time I hear it. A theory, in science, has a specific definition, and its very different from more common use of the word theory. Simply put, in science, a theory is a well proven, systematic explanation of a natural phenomenon. Evolution is a fact, it absolutely 100% happens, and the Theory of Evolution explains why. Gravity is a fact, and Einstein's General Theory of Relativity explains why. But in discussions, the scientific use of the word theory is often conflated with the popular definition of the word theory, which is just "an idea". In science, that would be a hypothesis at best.
I could go on in this vein for awhile, but you get the idea. The United States, and really the entire human race it seems like these days, desperately needs more STEM education.
BTW sasha, I am absolutely loving your signature quote. There are a truly ridiculous number of beetle species in the world.
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 16, 2021 20:24:38 GMT -5
Hey, Volk -
I'm not bothered by the metaphorical use of "energy" - after all, I've told many that I had "practically zero energy" the day after my 2nd COVID shot; and have disparaged others for projecting "negative energy". Or we talk about an event reaching "critical mass" even though it has nothing to do with neutron flux. The point is to use an image that makes your intention clear. What I find objectional are those New Agey advertisements for "all natural" "herbal" potions promising to restore "energy" while "flushing out toxins". Meh.
Then there's "quantum". The vaguest, most dubious of notions can be rendered credible by the inclusion of the word "quantum". I'd be willing to bet a Medicare reimbursement that most of those who bandy the word about haven't the faintest notion of what Planck meant when he coined it.
Yeah, hypothesis vs theory vs law - the lines are pretty clearly drawn on the scientific side, but I've walked both roads, and understand that linguistic imagery often arises by applying the strict definitions of usage in less literal and more metaphorical ways. I've never piloted an aircraft, but have often had to "fly by the seat of my pants". But still, your point is taken. Scientific illiteracy - about subject and more especialy, process - is a serious problem, one to become moreso in the coming years, methinks.
I love the Haldane quote, too. It seems that there are more documented varieties of Coleoptera than for any other order. If there is a God, he certainly loves his beetles! At least on this planet....
|
|
volkov
New Member
AC Veteran
Posts: 16
|
Post by volkov on Aug 16, 2021 20:57:21 GMT -5
Oh yeah, "toxins"! How could I forget about "toxins"! That's another one that gets horribly abused and misused. So does "organic" and of course "all natural". I mean cyanide is all natural and organic. Quantum is another favorite of Deepak Chopra and his ilk. They especially love the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and how you can't observe (measure really) something without changing it. Gives them all sorts of ways to claim the mind creates the universe. I get where you're coming from on energy, I mean personally webinar doesn't really bother me. That's just kind of a personal preference thing, I suppose. I don't like it when people talk about a mystical "energy", you don't like webinars. I think what bothers me is less the use of the word "theory" in a non-scientific sense, but the use of that word to try to refute scientific ideas. Like when an evolution denier (creationist, or intelligent designer) states "Evolution is just a theory", or a flat-earther states that "Gravity is just a theory". Its a clear lack of understanding of what the word theory actually means in a scientific sense. So I'm fine with less literal and more metaphorical uses of words, (I've also "flown by the seat of my pants", but never actually piloted an airplane) its just that I feel it belongs in certain arenas more than others, and when you come into the scientific realm, you should be using the scientific definitions. Glad we agree on the lack of science literacy being a large and growing issue though. LOL, indeed. Its thought that upwards of 25% of all species of animal on this planet is a member of the Coleopterans. Though that has recently been challenged, with some asserting that Hymenopterans, in particular parasitoid wasp species may actually outnumber the Coleopterans. So I guess God loves his beetles and his parasitic wasps.
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 17, 2021 10:13:07 GMT -5
This isn't exactly a peeve, more of a bemused observation - what appears to be a semantic shift in the meaning of some prepositions. I've always said (& heard) that satellites are placed "in orbit", and that mishaps occur "by accident". Lately I've heard "on" replacing both prepositions. (I've also heard "on line" used to refer to being in a queue, but not by anyone in my immediate circles.) I also heard an unusual usage several years ago following an emergency on the space station - a fire, I think. The mission commander stated something to the effect that the situation was under control, but they weren't standing down until they'd thoroughly "safed the situation". I'd never heard "safe" used as a verb before, transitive or otherwise. Nor have I heard it since, so maybe it was bit of linguistic ephemera - a natural mutation that just as naturally died out. If I ever come around for another go at a lifetime, I'd be willing to consider a career in computational linguistics..... (EDIT - This has become one of my favorite podcasts...)
|
|
|
Post by winddance on Aug 17, 2021 11:13:30 GMT -5
getting off the scientific strain, my pet peeve is the overuse of common term for intercourse. I believe the use of the "f" word should be saved for special occasions, like hitting your thumb with a hammer. we have a group of young adult neighbors that are extremely painful to listen to. it sounds like a competion to see who can use the f word more times in a sentence. I truly believe they can't hear how dumb it makes them all sound.
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 17, 2021 12:16:26 GMT -5
getting off the scientific strain, my pet peeve is the overuse of common term for intercourse. I believe the use of the "f" word should be saved for special occasions, like hitting your thumb with a hammer. we have a group of young adult neighbors that are extremely painful to listen to. it sounds like a competion to see who can use the f word more times in a sentence. I truly believe they can't hear how dumb it makes them all sound. It's a powerful rhetorical device, and like all such must be used sparingly. Overused, it becomes ineffective, losing its power, to become just another empty boast, a loose corrugated tin roof rattling in the wind. Several years ago I was taken in by a phone scammer (long uninteresting story). I knew immediately after hanging up that I'd been had, so canceled the credit card & got the charges forgiven - but I knew the guy would be calling back, so I rehearsed my schtick. I used his ploy of talking fast & nonstop, not giving him time to breathe, and giving me plenty of time to work myself up into a fury. I waited until the peak of my rant to deploy the Big Weapon - the F-bomb. It was like a Buddy Rich drum solo, building in intensity on the snares, and not hitting the cymbals until the very end. BTW, the guy did call looking for his money (excuse me, MY money), but at the end of my tirade he offered me a full refund. I declined, telling him I preferred to wait until Chase Bank had adjudicated. I never heard back from him.
|
|
volkov
New Member
AC Veteran
Posts: 16
|
Post by volkov on Aug 17, 2021 20:15:25 GMT -5
This isn't exactly a peeve, more of a bemused observation - what appears to be a semantic shift in the meaning of some prepositions. I've always said (& heard) that satellites are placed "in orbit", and that mishaps occur "by accident". Lately I've heard "on" replacing both prepositions. (I've also heard "on line" used to refer to being in a queue, but not by anyone in my immediate circles.) I also heard an unusual usage several years ago following an emergency on the space station - a fire, I think. The mission commander stated something to the effect that the situation was under control, but they weren't standing down until they'd thoroughly "safed the situation". I'd never heard "safe" used as a verb before, transitive or otherwise. Nor have I heard it since, so maybe it was bit of linguistic ephemera - a natural mutation that just as naturally died out. If I ever come around for another go at a lifetime, I'd be willing to consider a career in computational linguistics..... (EDIT - This has become one of my favorite podcasts...) I think that saying "on" instead of "in" in those contexts is the British English form, rather than the American English one. It could also be influence from China, Japan, or Korea, as I've read translated works from those countries where they refer to getting "on" a car rather than "in" a car.
|
|
|
Post by agrimmeer on Aug 18, 2021 15:21:04 GMT -5
Here in Texas, I can't get used to sentences starting with "I'm fixing to...", after 30+ years of living here. It means, "I'm going to..." and in exactly the same number of syllables. (I will however use "y'all" often, since I know of no other one-word second person plural in English.)
Many things I dislike about English are already ingrained and baked in, such as how "irregardless" and "regardless" can mean the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 19, 2021 9:51:17 GMT -5
I think of "I'm fixin' to..." (vs "I'm goin' to") as a southern regionalism, not a global feature of the language. As a New England transplant, maybe you remember "bang a left at the stop sign", for "turn left at the stop". I doubt you hear it far from Boston.
"Irregardless" irrirritates me, too - even though it's becoming acceptable. I'm not in a hurry to adopt it myself. Carelessness with "who" and "whom" hits a sour note with me, too.
"Your/you're", "there/they're/their", "it's/its" always trigger a red flag, but I've fallen over those tripwires too many times myself to point an accusatory finger.
Speaking of which, I've noticed an increased acceptance of plural "their" as a stand-in for the gender-inspecific singular personal pronoun English seems to lack: "Everyone must bring THEIR innoculation card to gain entry". I have no problem with this - "his or her" is just so stilted, and "their" works just fine - the meaning is clear.
Just last night I heard an interesting coinage: "open-source intel", referring to computer geeks using software tools to track down & identify Jan 6 rioters, and voluntarily sharing their results with law enforcement. The birth of a new metaphor, or just another virtual particle?
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 23, 2021 16:08:35 GMT -5
The peeves I've already whined about are mere quibbles compared to the noisome grunts of CorporateSpeak. God-Awmighty, the years I spent listening to semiliterate MBAs spouting that pompous rubbish. Never use a nickel word if you can find (or coin) a three-dollar one. It's not about clarity - its about obfuscation & pretense.....
|
|
|
Post by agrimmeer on Aug 25, 2021 16:11:15 GMT -5
I too am OK with 'their' being used that way, cuz I have some friends who prefer it that way, and their lives are hard enough--I'm happy with using the preferred word.
One thing I keep connecting this thread to (in my mind) is how Webster changed so many words, and many of those changes remained in place--his iterations are official and used today.
Maybe apropos, I wrote an article for my old firm about gunpowder-borne words. I'll see if I can't dig that up and post it here. It might be dross; I don't recall.
Re: corporate speak: I often feel like workers use those words to score points in an unspoken way (well, in a *spoken* way, but with unspoken rules). I get 1 point for showing that I grokked the boss's last sentence, and 2 points if I can reply with more corporate speak.
The thing I shudder over is: Will some of this corporate stuff end up in our regular language?
Did I just use the word 'grok'? Well, if it fits....
|
|
|
Post by petra6 on Jan 28, 2022 18:59:33 GMT -5
I probably have many. but two that come readily to mind are verb tenses that don't agree and when people begin a sentence with, " I mean". Makes me want to hurt someone.
|
|