eTerminology

The language is always changing. We call it linguistic change. Here’s a tongue-in-cheek article about 28 new vocabulary items that apply to our current connected culture. Most likely these won’t all enter the lexicon, but it’s a fun read. Maybe thought-provoking, too. Here are two samples:

And here’s the link, from a site called Information is Beautiful: https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/intermental/

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

A while back in Facebook I invited my readers to share a pet peeve about language usage. One reader (Hi Walter!) suggested that maybe know-it-all tech writers count as pet peeves. I know he was kidding because he’s a tech writer, but he has a point. Correcting someone’s language unasked tends to be irritating.

Almost everyone in the US speaks English, and most of us consider ourselves to be pretty good at it. We’re native speakers, right? Doesn’t being a native speaker make us automatically correct whenever we speak?

True, native speakers may coin new words whenever they like, but speaking tends to be more casual than writing, especially than technical (expository) writing. Sometimes we play fast and loose with the rules when we speak. That sort of informality isn’t a good idea in writing, though, especially when you explain something. Confucius said it well:

If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant. If what is said is not what is meant, then what ought to be done remains undone.

So what’s the problem? The problem is correcting someone’s language unasked. I think the habit of volunteering unasked-for advice in any field irritates people, not just unasked language advice.

I said this before, but I’ll say it again:

I resolve not to correct anyone’s language unless they ask.

You can kid me about it, though.

The  point of a headline is to get someone to read what follows, so the more sensational, the better. I could take about any headline nowadays: newspaper, magazine article, or on-line item for an example. Expository writing has the goal of explaining as plainly and accurately as possible. So here’s an example of a headline appropriate for the day:

I leave it as an exercise for the reader to re-write a headline as a piece of good old plain exposition. Post some in the comments.

Here’s the comic:

(There ain’t no such thing as passive aggressive, but you know that.)

Here’s the rule: Try never to use the passive. No joke!

My peevishness is aroused when people use transitive verbs as if they were intransitive, particularly “display” and “complete.”

Enough jargon. Here’s a definition by example:

When you display, you display something. When you complete, you complete something.

Back to jargon: That word “something” is called a direct object, and transitive verbs always have one. Intransitive verbs don’t have to have one: you can think, you can suppose, you can walk, you can appear or disappear (in a puff of smoke, perhaps), all without having to put something after them. That’s intransitive.

Here’s an article where they (The National Oceanography Centre in the UK) do it wrong in the headline, then do it right in the article (with a different verb, but you get the point):

The COMICS expedition completes

  The first COMICS expedition reached a conclusion just before Christmas, having collected a great data set on biological carbon in the Ocean’s twilight zone.

I suppose we grammar curmudgeons will have to get used to this solecism, especially the one with “display,” because computer instructions are so common. But when you press Enter, the window doesn’t display, it appears!

Harrumpf.