Larry King on Language

Posted on May 17, 2009 by languageandgrammar

When I was doing a recent google search for trendy language (is that really that much more difficult than saying when I recently googled trendy language?), I came across some Larry King commentary on the topic. His comments, found at Larry King about trendy language, mirror many of the thoughts we have.

King touches on the effectiveness of simplicity in language, turning nouns into verbs,  instant cliches, and inflated language. The post says that the article was found in the Bangkok Post in 1996, but it’s still valid today–if not moreso.

–Paul

Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Larry King on Language

Desperation Versus Determination

Posted on May 13, 2009 by languageandgrammar

I believe in the power of words, and I also believe in the power of positive energy; therefore, it’s not surprising that I believe it’s important to focus our language–and thus our lives– in a positive direction. That’s why I’m starting a new feature on the blog, Words to Live By, which will attempt, through language, to give us a way to turn some negative aspects of our lives into positive ones.

Similar But Vastly Different

When either desperate or determined, we have no control over the outcome–we don’t currently have what we want and whether we get it isn’t up to us; however, desperation is living passively and hopelessly, and determination is living actively and confidently.

Desperation

We have all desperately wanted something, whether we desperately wanted a relationship to work out, desperately wanted a particular job, or  desperately wanted to lose weight. I’m talking about true desperation, not just wanting something that would make your life better as long as it’s convenient.

This is the only person who will make me happy, and I know I’ll never be happy if this doesn’t work out.

This is the perfect  job for me, and if I don’t get it, I will have wasted the years of preparation leading to this moment–it will all be gone, and another opportunity like this will never come my way.

I am overweight, unhealthy, and unattractive, and if I don’t do something about it, I’ll always hate myself.

We’ve all felt that desperation, and we’ve all felt that heavy, torturous hopelessness and lack of power that comes with it. It’s a paralyzing feeling as you wait for someone or something to decide your fate. It prevents you from controlling your own life.

That’s no way to live, and perhaps more important, it’s no way for you to get what you want. My recommendation is that you turn desperation into determination.

Determination

A determined person focuses on what he wants and commits to doing whatever he needs to do in order to get it.  I’m talking about a sincere, focused commitment to a specific goal, not wishing that things were different as long as it’s easy.

I hope this relationship works out, but I’m determined to find a way to be happy regardless, either with someone else or by myself. No man or woman is going to decide whether I’m happy.

I’ve worked too hard and too long for me not to find a job that satisfies all of my needs, and I’m going to find it even if it takes until the day before I retire. This one job isn’t going to make or break my career.

I’ve made a lot of poor choices in my life, but I’m going to love myself today and commit to whatever changes I need to make in order to be healthy.

We’ve all felt the feeling of true determination–and the sense of hope and power that comes with it. We know what we want, and nothing is going to stop us. It’s a great feeling.

Desperation or Determination

When faced with something that we want and have no control over whether we get it, we can be desperate or determined. It’s a choice.

–Paul

Posted in language, words to live by | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Possessive Pairs

Posted on May 11, 2009 by languageandgrammar

No, I’m not talking about when your wife won’t let you go out with your friends or your husband doesn’t let you talk to anyone at the office Christmas party. What I’m talking about is how to indicate possession when discussing a single object that belongs to two people.

If two people own or have possession of one thing, put the apostrophe after only the second name. For example, if John and Mary host a show together, we referred to it as John and Mary’s show.

Other examples: Dick and George’s secret plan (one plan that they devised together), Barack and Michelle’s gift to the Queen (they gave her one gift together), and Sherry and Paul’s blog.

If you’re talking about two separate things that belong to two separate people, however, each name gets an apostrophe, as in John’s and Mary’s shows, and Newsweek’s and Time’s front-page stories (each has its own front-page story).

Sherry

Posted in language | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Your Language Complaints

Posted on May 6, 2009 by languageandgrammar

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, this is the fourth installment of what you, the readers languageandgrammar.com, have listed as Your Pet Peeves.

Since we’ve had well over 100 comments, with probably close to 200 peeves, we thought that it only be fair that we highlight them.

There is absolutely no truth to the rumor that we’re just trying to prove that other people complain as much as we do.

Your peeves:

  • “This won’t talk English to me” (I don’t work in a video store, as our commentor did, so I’ve never heard it)
  • “Methinks” being correct is a pet peeve of someone who wanted to mock me for saying something makes as much sense as saying “me thinks” in Literally, the Best Language Book Ever (What? You didn’t buy a copy yet? Me thinks you should.)
  • 12 midnight and 12 noon (not sure of what the peeve was–other than sometimes using a.m. and p.m. is not always clear)
  • More disagreement with redundant entries in my book (yes, the same person), including brief summary, close proximity, final conclusion and new development (I guess maybe I was his pet peeve!)
  • Another “gotcha” from the same man (I’d hate to read his comments if hadn’t liked my book!) about an incorrect tense and disagreement about the lack of logic of “pushing the envelope.”
  • Using “Impact” to mean “affect,” which is one of Sherry’s favorite topics (Impact Does Not Mean to Affect, More on Impact, and It’s Not Impactful–It’s Inane)
  • Misuse of “gotten”
  • “Anyways” in stead of “anyway”
  • Using “on either side” instead of “on both sides” (On Either Side of This Mistake)
  • “Most importantly” instead of “most important” (Most Important/Most Importantly)
  • “PIN Number” redundancy
  • “Irregardless” (No Regard for Irregardless)
  • “Can you be more pacific” instead of “Can you be more specific” (ha!)
  • “My point being is” instead of “my point is”
  • Lack of proper punctuation, capitalization in e-mail, instant messages, twitter posts, etc.
  • Every so often
  • “All of the sudden” instead of “all of a sudden”
  • “Couple something” rather than “couple of something” (You Have a Couple Of Something, Not A Couple Something)
Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

I Was So Dis-focused—–I Mean Distracted….

Posted on May 4, 2009 by languageandgrammar

I heard a commentator on one of the 24-hour news channels use the non-word dis-focus last week. At first, I thought that it was a grammatical hiccup, but then he used it thrice more.

He was talking about one of the political parties using one issue to dis-focus the country from another issue. Did he really think that dis-focus was a word? Did he just draw a blank four times when trying to think of the word distract? And if he did draw a blank, couldn’t he have just said take the focus off? I wish I knew the answer to at least one of these questions.

I was so jarred by the commentator’s repeated use of dis-focus that I, myself, became dis-focused—-I mean distracted—-and lost interest in what he was saying. That’s something to consider when trying to make yourself sound smarter by using non-words: People will often become so distracted by your grammar that your message will be lost. It’s better to stick with simple, straightforward, standard language.

Sherry

Posted in language | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on I Was So Dis-focused—–I Mean Distracted….

Snow in May?

Posted on May 2, 2009 by languageandgrammar

Since it’s the weekend, I thought I’d take a break from grammar and highlight my favorite weather blog (Paul’s!), cloudyandcool.com.

While I like snow as much as the next person during the winter, I certainly don’t want to think about it now. Who knew that it could still snow in May (Sometimes Snow Comes Down in May)?

Sherry

Posted in off topic | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Snow in May?

Close But No Cigarette

Posted on April 30, 2009 by languageandgrammar

We’ve all done it–either misstated something or slightly mangled a common statement or cliche, and the result was a humorous sentence that didn’t make sense. I call this “close but no cigarette.”

One of our blogger friends, Pamela Villars, recently posted a comment about such an example. She’d heard a news report stating that “The city will replant the trees that it has cut down.” I doubt that planting those now-dead trees is going to work; they’d be better off planting new trees.

I recently came across a Web site that highlighted many erroneous statements, most of which were written in non-English-speaking countries, which makes the mistakes more understandable–but not any less funny.

Here are a few examples (for the entire article, read Whoops! That’s not what I meant):

In an Acapulco hotel:  The manager has personally passed all the water served here. (He must spend a lot of time in the bathroom.)

In a cemetery:  Persons are prohibited from picking flowers from any but their own graves. (Remind me not to go to this place when the moon is full.)

In a Japan hotel:  You are invited to take advantage of the chambermaid. (Talk about customer service!)

–Paul

Posted in grammar, humor, language, writing | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Don’t Torture Me: Tortuous, Torturous

Posted on April 29, 2009 by languageandgrammar

Sometimes, learning grammar rules can be torturous. Or is it tortuous?

Be careful with these two words; the second -r makes all the difference. Torturous has torture as its root, and it means that something is very painful, that is, causes torture. Having to sit through a 45-minute meeting was torturous.

Tortuous (without the second -r) refers to something that has many twists and turns, as in Malibu Canyon is a tortuous road. Tortuous also can refer to something that has many twists and turns psychologically, that is, is circuitous, as in His argument was so tortuous that I never quite saw his point.

So, is learning grammar rules torturous or tortuous? I suppose depending on who’s doing the teaching, it can be both.

Sherry

Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Going Nucular

Posted on April 27, 2009 by languageandgrammar

Richard Nixon once said, “…when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Well, that might be true of wire-tapping without court-approved warrants, but I’m almost certain that it does not hold true for grammar, punctuation, and pronunciation errors.

Speaking of presidents, although former President Bush consistently pronounced the word nuclear as nucular, the word is pronounced noo-klee-er.

Enough said.

Sherry

Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Why Language Changes

Posted on April 23, 2009 by languageandgrammar

We at languageandgrammar.com don’t throw around the term “great” loosely, but Forbes.com has a great article on the evolution of words.  Actually, we’re just having a little bit of fun. It wouldn’t be fair for us to comment on the quality of the article—since we wrote it.

We did think that our regular readers might appreciate being directed to the article, though; it’s called  Why Language Changes.

Our article is part of a larger feature on neologisms. You can see the entire feature here.

Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , | 5 Comments