Wordsmithery

Telling it like it isn't

2009-03-16T23:13:00.002Z

I love euphemisms. Well, those used for comedy effect. I don't mean things like this.

I'm sure we've all seen someone we like and been keen to have a 'tongue in cheek conversation at point blank range' with them. Then maybe if that didn't work out, got a bit 'tired and emotional' and perhaps had a 'reversal of fortune' on the 'porcelain telephone to god'. These are all good.

But even better are accidental ones, where people are just trying to be polite. As anyone who knows her will testify, there are very few people sweeter or more polite than my girlfriend, Ruth. Last summer, we were on holiday in Italy with my parents and my mum was driving the hire car. She was attempting to back out of a parking space but the car wasn't moving and my mum wondered aloud why.

"I don't think you're quite in reverse," said Ruth. Coming from me, this would have sounded/actually been sarcastic but from Ruth you just knew it was her way of gently informing my mum of the problem.

Then just the other day, I got home to find the bathroom light on. My housemate Lucille was in her room and as I wanted to have a shower asked her if she was finished in the bathroom.

"I will be. Once I've had my bath."

'I will be.' How brilliant is that? Has there ever been a more positive, less offensive way of saying 'no'? Short of outright lying, I'm not sure that can be beaten.

If anyone knows of any better euphemisms, I'd love to hear about them.

Unmissable?

2009-02-26T22:14:00.002Z

I have a gripe. And it's not that often I have a gripe about the BBC but this time I do.

It's this tagline for the iPlayer, which incidentally, I happen to think is a wonderful invention. In case you've missed it, this is the tagline:

Making the unmissable... unmissable

Now, technically 'unmissable' can mean 'cannot be missed' or 'should not be missed'. I suspect, knowing marketing people as I do, that they intended this to be the former. After all, hyperbole is rarely far away when trying to sell something. But if they mean that then even having the iPlayer in the first place means they've lied, as it wasn't unmissable in the first place.

If we assume they mean you shouldn't miss it, then that's what the iPlayer is for and programmes are available on the iPlayer. For seven days. A week! Go on holiday and that's that! Quite easily missable, I'd say.

The other problem I have with this description is that it assumes that everything available on iPlayer is of exceptional quality. Nature's Great Events? Yes sirreebob. Not Going Out. Absobloodylutely. EastEnders? Really? Eggheads? Er...

So I propose a change to the tagline. How about this?

Making what you've missed and that is occasionally good television... available for a week

Catchy eh?

Restructured by 10%

2009-02-11T16:27:00.002Z

There are a lot of words in the English language, somewhere between 150,00 and 200,000, depending on how you count it. Despite taking a greater interest than many in words, there are still thousands of words for which I do not know the meaning.

However, one that I do know, and I'm sure you do as well, is 'restructure'. It means, as far as I'm aware, to change the structure, to rearrange the component parts thus altering the shape or form. What is does not mean is to reduce. And yet, I have just read a press release which states that a company will "restructure its workforce by 10%."

You can see what's happened here. They're making some people redundant but don't want to say so outright and have decided that 'restructure' is less negative than 'reduce'. Well, it is, but what they've ended up with is a sentence that makes no sense whatsoever.

How on earth can anything be restructured by a percentage? It's either restructured or it isn't. Do they honestly believe that the reader will not realise that they mean reduced? If they do think that, they're treating the reader like idiots. And if they don't believe that, then they're idiots themselves.

The Plain English Campaign has been running since 1979. Let's keep it going eh?

Very

2009-01-30T19:08:00.003Z

The word 'very', as we all know, is an adverb. And as we also know adverbs are words which modify adjectives. They are, if you will, adjectival modifiers. An easy way to spot adverbs is to look for words that end -ly, as in 'I found the writer's tone hugely patronising' or 'if he doesn't get to the point soon I'll be leaving this site quickly.'

Very is a useful word because it gives extra meaning to a word - 'very hot' adds to the hotness just as 'very quick' adds to the quickness. I know, I'm labouring this but I do have a point to make. Have a look at this photo.

I don't know about you but to me some words just don't lend themselves to adjectival modifiers, such as very. 'Unique' is one of these words and to a certain extent I think 'local' is too. Local is defined as belonging to one's neighbourhood. Now clearly a neighbourhood is not a specific area but very local? When I saw the sign I actually looked around me to see if I could see a field of sheep (I couldn't). Not only that, but I couldn't even see the butcher's so they can't have been that local.

But the real point is how much meaning the 'very' is adding to the 'local' here. If I wanted to buy some lamb and be carbon neutral about it, for example, locally produced lamb would be enough for me. If the baby sheep was raised in the garden round the back of the butcher's, I'm really not sure I would be extra tempted to buy it on that basis. In fact, I'd probably be a bit worried.

So there we have it, a lesson for us all. Adverbs can be overused. But not very overused.

Metaphors, similes, analogies and sayings

2009-01-26T21:27:00.004Z

As the English language has developed, certain phrases have become common currency. There, that was a metaphor without me even trying. It's not really a currency is it? You can't buy anything with words. But you can buy time. Although only metaphorically, of course.

So yes, phrases and sayings, metaphors and similes abound. These are useful as it means we don't repeat the same words over and over again and can add a bit of colour to conversations and writing. And there's another one, a metaphorical use of the word colour. I literally can't help myself. Which is a shame because apparently God helps those that helps themselves. I've always wondered if that applied to buffets. If I help myself to the sausages on sticks and barbecue chicken wings, will God help me? And if so, why?

But I digress.The problem is though, that with so many familiar sayings flying about, some of us are bound to get them muddled up or just make them up without even realising it.

In the heat of the moment it's easy to lose track of your own thoughts. This one was overheard on American radio.

"On a scale of one to ten, this is a disaster."

Some people just mix words together that might initially sound right but don't pass mustard under scrutiny. (And if you don't get that, I can't be bothered to explain it to you.)

"She took to it like a fish out of water."

"There was every colour under the rainbow."

"He's as calm as cucumber."

Sometimes it's good to be inventive. Indeed, at school when children are taught about similes and analogies they're sometimes asked to come up with their own ones to show they've understood the principle. Here are a few of my favourites from an email I received many years ago. I know, I'm weird like that, but it's worth it, trust me.

"The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn't."

You can't argue with it but it's not quite poetry is it?

"John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who had also never met."

I can just imagine the author of this gem thinking, 'Shit, I need to put a simile in here somewhere! Now where can I put it?'

And then there's this one, which is so good it might just be apocryphal.

"Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever."

I'll leave you with my favourite simile of recent times. I'm having to paraphrase because I can't find it now but you'll get the gist I'm sure.

"... which is as impressive as a simile I've haven't written yet ."

Ariane, I salute you.

The wrong words

2009-01-19T17:06:00.001Z

I'm often accused of being a pedant. I'm happy to admit to this, especially as sometimes I get paid to be one.

Everyone makes typos so while I'm happy to point them out and correct them I don't feel smug in so doing. I'm just doing a necessary part of my job. But what really gets my goat is when people use words incorrectly with misplaced confidence.

One of these words which seems to have found its way into the public consciousness is 'unchartered', as in 'unchartered territory'. The verb to charter means to hire, as in chartering a plane. In this context, the territory isn't being hired or not hired, it's being charted, as in mapped. So the phrase should be 'uncharted territory'.

Another is 'pacific' (or possibly 'pecific'), as in 'I don't have the pacific details yet.' Why so many people find it impossible to put the letter 's' at the start is beyond me. Possibly they think that the Pacific Ocean is so named because it is intended for, or applying to a particular thing. In fact, pacific means peaceful.

Then there's 'adverse' and 'averse'. The number of girl's internet dating profiles I read who claimed they 'weren't adverse to a glass of vino' astounded me. Not for their drinking habits but more for the fact that they put 'adverse' (meaning unfavourable or hostile i.e. adverse weather conditions ) when they meant 'averse' (meaning having an opposition for). Although the meanings are somewhat similar, the rule of thumb is adverse for things, averse for people.

Many people either think that 'imply' and 'infer' are interchangeable or simply don't care what the difference is. I can't remember how I found out but the following exchange from the Dennis Quaid film DOA sticks in my mind.

Bernard: I don't think I like what you're inferring, Mr. Cornell...
Dexter Cornell: [condescendingly] Implying. When I say it, that's implying. How you take it, that's inferring.
Bernard : I see. Infer this.
[punches Dexter]

These examples seem to be more often heard than written, and there are many of the latter that bug the hell out of me.

But that's just me. You might well be uninterested. But what you're not, in this context at least, is disinterested.

Language

2009-01-04T11:03:00.004Z

Back in the late 80s and early 90s my favourite television programme bar none was A Bit of Fry & Laurie. Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie were not long out of Cambridge's illustrious Footlights and forging their own unique path in British comedy.

One of the things that appealed to me about the show was their wordplay, their love of language, as well as their not inconsiderable comedic talents. Puns and surreal conversations were the lifeblood of the programme and I, in typical schoolboy fashion, would learn the sketches and quote them to my friends. Lord only knows why. Teenagers are a funny lot.

One particular sketch was slightly more esoteric than most and in it Stephen discussed, to a largely baffled Hugh, the flexibility of language.

"Our language, hundreds of thousands of available words, frillions of possible legitimate new ideas, so that I can say this sentence and be confident it has never been uttered before in the history of human comunication: 'Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers.' One sentence, common words, but never before placed in that order."

It's frivolous and ridiculous but makes a valid point and this subject of the variety and beauty of language is something that Stephen has recently returned to in his latest podgram. In it, he revels in what Roland Barthes called the jouissance or 'juicy joy' of language. Anyone who watches QI or has read any of Fry's work will know that he also uses his impressive vocabulary not simply to impress but because he enjoys it so very much, and in so doing delivers a rich texture to his thoughts and ideas that would not otherwise have been possible.

He goes on to discuss the evolution of language, such as how 'willy nilly' used to mean very specifically 'whether you like it or not' and now means something more like 'haphazard'. He suggests that far from despairing at these changes, we ought to embrace them wholeheartedly.

He also reveals a hatred of pedants, the sort of people who start campaigns to make supermarkets change their signs from '5 items or less' to '5 items or fewer'. Whilst they are indubitably correct, it's petty and filled with a sneering smugness that is deeply unattractive. He rightly points out that it would be lot better of these people were to spend their time creating stories or plays or poems, indeed anything remotely creative instead of writing letters of complaint to newspapers.

For some of us, getting these things right in the first place is our job and so unfortunately spotting errant apostrophes becomes second nature. As much as I'd like to write with a freedom I might employ in my own writing, all the jouissance in the world isn't going to help me retain my contracts with my clients.

And besides, if no one bothered about apostrophes anymore, some people would be really annoyed. Because whatever you might think of Britney's pears, you could never say that Hilary's wank.

Graffiti

2009-01-01T19:50:00.000Z

While one shouldn't condone vandalism, it's hard to deny that some graffiti is exceptionally funny and clever.

When I was at school, a favourite among my football-loving friends was the following.

JESUS SAVES
But Lineker scores on the rebound

I also like this.

Fight apathy. Or don't

Just the other day I saw this. Or rather, these. The best ones seem to be those which build organically.

Why do we write on walls?
I don't.
This is a door!

Brilliantly simple and simply brilliant

2008-12-26T12:47:00.000Z

Inspired by seeing the 1951 film version on television on Christmas Eve, I've just re-read Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol.

It was written in 1843, and took Dickens a mere six weeks to complete, apparently because he was under pressure to deliver it in order to pay off an old debt. It never ceases to amaze me how an impending deadline can bring out the best in people. Of course, it helped that Dickens was one of the best writers ever but still.

Its popularity has ensured its familiarity and this tale of revelation, realisation and redemption seems almost too straightforward by today's storytellling standards. But in fact, it is the simplicity of the story that makes it the classic that it is.

Dickens has an exquisite turn of phrase and also displays a wicked sense of humour, even, or perhaps especially, when the tone is dark. Here, Scrooge is awaiting the second spirit.

"... he was ready for a good broad field of strange appearances, and that nothing between a baby and rhinoceros would have astonished him very much... All this time, he lay upon his bed, the very core and centre of a blaze of ruddy light... and was sometimes apprehensive that he might be at that very moment an interesting case of spontaneous combustion without having the consolation of knowing it."

Towards the end of the story, we meet the spirit of Christmas yet to come, who does not speak but simply points to what Scrooge should observe.

"The spirit stopped; the hand was pointed elsewhere.

'The house is yonder,' Scrooge explained. 'Why do you point away?'

The inexorable finger underwent no change."

The idea of a finger being inexorable is brilliant but is also so simple and so apt.

A Christmas Carol also proves that you don't need to write a lot in order to
create an impact. At just under 100 pages in length, it's short but emphatic in its message, something a lot of modern writers across all media would do well to imitate.

In the beginning

2008-12-26T11:09:00.000Z

I've always loved words. Mind you, I wasn't always very good at them. Some of my first attempts were a bit amateurish, if I'm honest. Childish even. But then I was a child so that was probably acceptable.

For example, 'durden' was a favourite for some time. Not familiar with that one? I was trying to say that there was a bird in the garden. So that was probably my first attempt at communicating concisely, something which is very important to me. Of course, using the fewest possible syllables isn't always enough to get the message across and I think I soon grew out of that one.

Then, I moved onto my first spoonerism by asking if we were going to put our car in the big 'par cark'. Strictly speaking it's not even a true spoonerism - "you've hissed all my mystery lessons" is more like it, even if it isn't a genuine one from Reverend Spooner himself - but it certainly stayed in the family for many years.

When I started reading, a whole new world was revealed to me, even if I didn't always read things very carefully in my haste to devour the story. It was some time before it was pointed out to me that the big scavenging bird I was referring to as a 'vutle' was actually a vulture.

Since then I've become a lot more careful with my pronunciation - doing voice over doesn't leave a lot of scope for errors. But I am still partial to making words up, where appropriate of course. I wouldn't want to swiften your exit from my shiny new blog, after all.