Everything Language and Grammar

Archive for December, 2007

See You Next Year

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 31, 2007

Do yourself and everyone you know a favor–fight the nearly uncontrollable urge to say see you next year today.

I know that it’s New Year’s Eve, which means that the next time you’ll see many people, it will, indeed, be next year. That’s how it works when we all use the same calendar! I know that nearly every 12-year-old in the country thinks that saying it is the epitome of cleverness. I know that you’ve said it to your co-workers every December 31 for the last two decades. I know that everyone says it to you. I know. I know. I know.

And so does everyone else, so don’t say it!

In my upcoming book, I have a chapter called You Thought You Were Clever, But…, and saying see you next year on December 31 is a classic example of the everyone-knows-it’s-no-longer-clever-but-we-still-say-it line that made me write that chapter–and, perhaps more important, annoys everyone!

Try Happy New Year instead. It works just as well, and you’re more likely to not spend Near Year’s Eve alone with Dick Clark (and that Seacrest guy).

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in humor, language | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off

Democrat Party

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 27, 2007

A politician’s image is as finely crafted as a pink flamingo made of hand-blown glass, so when something is repeated by a politician or a political party, there can be no question that it’s being done for a reason. There are no oversights; how the politician or political party is perceived is too important.

That’s why it’s no accident that President Bush and his Republican counterparts occasionally refer to the Democratic party as the “Democrat party.” They have made the conscious decision to drop the -ic when referring to their political counterparts, so that leaves us to determine the reason.

I doubt that the answer will come from Karl Rove’s new blockbuster tell-all account of the current administration since indications are that the history is considered as malleable as play dough, so let me take a guess–from the perspective of language, of course. Our system is a democratic one, and as such, the word democratic has a very positive connotation in the eyes of Americans. The goal of changing the reference to his political opponents from Democratic Party to Democrat Party is to attempt separate their opponents from something positive.

It’s subtle, and this isn’t the most heinous abuse of language I’ve ever seen, especially since it makes it seem as if the speaker just made a verbal mistake since we all know that it’s the Democratic Party. It is, however, a good reminder that we need to listen closely to the subtlety of language. 

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language, politics | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

Controlling Destiny

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 25, 2007

Bob Costas, on Sunday Night Football, made a good point about language, so I though I’d share it.

It’s common for sports announcers and fans alike to talk about how a team “controls its own destiny” when the team playoff chances rests completely on whether the team in question wins or loses. Other teams do not need to lose for the team in question to make the playoffs–their winning their own games is enough.

He made the point that “destiny” is typically thought of something that happens regardless of our own efforts, such as “I was destined to find this job.” I had no control over it; a higher power had pre-determined that I would be in the right place when the job became available. Personally, I don’t believe much in the whole destiny thing, but that’s not the point here.

Costas’ point was that teams can’t control the uncontrollable, and he’s right. If we believe destiny to be something that is pre-determined, then it makes no sense to talk about controlling it.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language, sports | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Santa Claus Is Coming to Town…

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 23, 2007

…well, not if he can help it.

I’m not a big fan of the commercialism of Christmas, but I do enjoy the traditional Christmas smorgasbord of television and video offerings. While I understand that Santa spends an endless night of sleigh rides and chimney dives, I’ve noticed that he might not actually be enjoying his work, especially since–from what I’ve seen–he’s tried every excuse in the book to get out of delivering the goods.

Take the “Rudolph” year for example. The North Pole is known for its blustery, cold weather (I should know; I’m a meteorologist’s wife); however, a little bit of snow and a little bit of wind, and Santa couldn’t wait to rush into his workshop and declare that Christmas was off. If it hadn’t been for Rudolph showing off in front of all of those witnesses….

Despite all of his good press, Santa seems to have a bit of an insecurity problem, too, which he’s tried to use to get himself the day off. In The Year without a Santa Claus, all it took was a couple of kids not believing in him, and he was ready to throw in the towel and declare Christmas canceled (noticing a trend here?). Of course, in order to save face, he also tried to convince everyone that he was fighting a cold. Fighting a cold? When was the last time anyone else got to take a day off work because he or she was fighting a cold? You may as well call off tired!

What many people might not know is that Santa’s excuses actually go all the way back to pre-historic times. It’s a little-known fact that Fred Flintstone was the one who delivered presents all over the world on two–that’s right, two–Christmases. In Christmas Flintstone, after a grueling night of playing Santa to dozens, maybe hundreds, of kids at Macyrock’s, Fred is practically kidnapped by two of Santa’s elves and coerced into doing Santa’s deliveries. It seems, once again, that Santa has a cold. Now, if he hadn’t used this excuse before, I might feel sorry for him, but I’m not falling for that again.

In A Flintstone Christmas, Santa “falls” off Fred’s roof and declares that he can’t possibly finish his shift because of a sprained ankle. Isn’t it an odd coincidence that it was Fred’s roof? I mean, Santa already knew that Fred was a capable replacement for him, so I’m not so sure that the obstacle course roof story holds much water.

Well, at least he didn’t try to use the “I’m getting a cold” excuse again.

-Sherry

Posted in humor, off topic | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Ho Ho Ho

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 23, 2007

Christmas is allegedly a religious holiday, but it’s so much more–it’s commercial, something to obsess over, a source of some bad music, and an opportunity to exclude those who don’t celebrate. With that much to choose from, it’s no wonder why I occasionally fill my weather blog with posts about Christmas!

My Dear Santa post listed items that I didn’t want for Christmas while Christmas Cheer is about some of the truly bad Christmas songs. Everything Christmas Season is about our ever-growing need for everything Christmas, which is not to be confused with Everything Language and Grammar. Last and most important, If It Were a Holiday Tree, Then It Would have Dreidls on It talks about the need to include everyone rather than exclude some during the holiday season.

–Paul

Posted in humor, off topic | Tagged: | Comments Off

IBM Gets It

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 22, 2007

IBM is, of course, known for many things, not the least of which is, as they say on their Web site, integrating “hardware, software and IT services into business solutions to meet your goals.”

As such, I’m sure that they’re intimately familiar with–and have probably contributed to–many of the trendy words, phrases, and expressions that have seemingly swallowed the business world. These include some entries that I talk about in one of the chapters of the book, such as “Think outside the box,” “efficiency,” and “skill set,” but it’s nice to see that even they see the inanity of much of what is said in offices.

I’m referring to their recent commercial that mocks workplace behavior, including the emphasis on processes and efficiency. They even show a group of workers lying in a room, “ideating.” The supervisor in the commercial was not impressed with the process, but I was impressed that IBM was willing to have some fun at the expense of the business world.

 –Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language | Tagged: , , | Comments Off

Credibility Gap

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 15, 2007

When the way a word is used is changed, it has been changed for a reason.

Sometimes it’s the actual definition of the word that changes, such as the word issue. I talk about this in the book, and since it’s not the focus of this entry, I’ll just summarize: We now use the words problem and issue synonymously because somewhere along the line someone made the conscious choice to talk about problems in a less direct manner. Now, we all do it, so it no longer works. It’s still annoying, though–and getting more so every day.

Sometimes, the change is not as obvious as changing the definition of a word; sometimes, there’s a subtle change in order to make something sound less negative. That’s certainly the case with the word credibility and its sister mini-phrase, credibility gap. Credibility means able to be believed or trustworthy, which are wonderful traits, especially for a politician, and credibility gap is now a trendy way of saying lacking credibility.

Now, nearly every political commentator says something like President Bush has a credibility issue (don’t get me started on issue again) or that There is a credibility gap when it comes to this issue (correct usage!) when what they mean is that He can’t be believed or that He is lying about this topic.

Why has this changed? In my opinion, it’s because sympathetic commentators decided that this was a less harsh way of saying that the president lied and less sympathetic commentators followed their lead since people tend to imitate others rather than think for themselves.

Regardless, the result is a less-than-accurate portrayal of information.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language, politics | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

If A Blog is Written in the Woods…

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 13, 2007

…and no one reads it, then is it still a blog?

What I’m trying to say is that I know that it takes a while to become established in the blog community, and since you’ve got to start somewhere, this is it. Let me tell you a little about what to expect in the blog.

The title of the blog, of course, is language and grammar, so that’s what most of the posts will be about. Notice, though, that the name of the blog is not boring language and grammar, so it’s  not going to be dry, monotonous, and bland as a sixth-grade English class on a Friday afternoon.

The posts will be light, interesting, and full of examples taken from everyday conversations, television, the Internet, and newspapers. The posts will also go beyond grammar rules–although those are important and will be include–since good communication goes beyond grammar rules.

 I could go on, but one of the rules about good communication is knowing when to stop.

–Paul

Posted in grammar, language | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off

Coming Soon

Posted by languageandgrammar on December 10, 2007

This blog will soon be filled with all of the language and grammar information that you could possibly want.

Posted in language | Comments Off

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 43 other followers