Elocution Isn't Everything – It's The
Only Thing
I spend a lot of time writing about
people who maim and massacre words in the beautiful, lyrical Italian
language. But you know what? I live in America and unless I wander in
to what passes for an Italian restaurant around here, my chances of
hearing Italian being butchered are fairly slim. Not so with English,
however; that poor, beleaguered language gets beaten and battered
every day by those for whom it is supposed to be a native tongue.
Malapropisms, mangled idioms, made up words, or just general
grammatical abuse, all usually uttered with complete sincerity, are,
nonetheless, sometimes hilarious.
I was speaking with a teenager the
other day who was telling me about his efforts to speak properly and
his belief that doing so was essential to being taken seriously in
life. What a breath of fresh air! Honest proof of hope for the
future. I shared with him my philosophy that elocution isn't
everything – it's the only thing, and that sometimes you have to be
a square in order to be well-rounded. If only this young man could be
cloned, perhaps some of my pet linguistic foibles and faux pas would
become extinct. Speaking of which, I know someone who says “faux
pas” in reverse, rendering it as “po fa.” I hope the person is
just being funny.
One of my favorite abused idioms is
“cut the mustard.” Referring to something weak or unable to
perform, and often rendered as “Can't cut the mustard,” or “too
old to cut the mustard,” this one is a real hoot. Why intelligent
people would think that performance and a spicy yellow condiment were
in any way related is quite beyond me. The proper term is “cut the
muster” and is a reference
to a military roll, or muster. When one is too old or otherwise too
infirm to appear for duty on said muster, one is unable to make the
cut, or to “cut the muster.” I know some Dijon can be a little
thick, but I've never yet encountered a mustard that I had to cut.
Then there's “for
all intensive purposes.” A thorough and intensive examination of
this phrase will reveal that the actual term is “for all intents
and purposes.” “Intensive purposes?” Please!
I used to know
someone who used the phrase “a blessing in the skies.” (Sigh) I
don't much associate with that person anymore, and that may, indeed,
be a “blessing in disguise.” Or perhaps just a blessing.
Then there are
folks who like to “wet” their appetites. I don't know to what
degree moisture affects the appetite, but I prefer to sharpen – or
to “whet” – mine, thank you.
There's
probably no hope for this one: “spitting image.” Used to describe
an exact duplicate, especially of a person, it's really rather
disgusting when you come to think of it. Who would want an image of
themselves that expectorates? The actual idiom is “spit and image”
and it has been around for a very long time. Some theorize that it
has biblical origins relating to God's using his “spit” to create
man in his image. A newer take holds that the term is derived from
“spitten,” the archaic dialectical past participle of the word
“spit.” Yale University's Laurence Horn, a professor of
linguistics, opines that said "spitten
image" refers to "a likeness that was literally spit out,
but where figuratively the 'spit' in question involved a rather
different bodily fluid."
Think about that the next time you're tempted to use the expression.
I also love people who make up new
words. Some folks feel that using ten-dollar words will make them
sound more knowledgeable. And that's generally true – unless the
words are made up and not worth ten cents. For example, I know
someone who says “categoried” when he means “categorized.” An
object with a purpose is “functionable” rather than “functional.”
A person is “instituted” instead of being “institutionalized.”
And when all is right with the world, there is a sense of “normalty.”
I keep trying to tell this person that there is “normality” and
there is “normalcy,” but there is no such state as “normalty.”
But I get nowhere because he “lives under the optical illusion”
that he is extremely intelligent.
There's no shortage of mangled words in
American English. Besides the aforementioned, dozens of others come
quickly to mind. The following are a few of my favorites:
Acrossed vs Across – I am
certain you have come “acrossed” many people who incorrectly
employ this one. “Crossed” is a past tense verb. “Cross” is a
present tense verb. “Across” is an adverb. In the statement “I
went across the street,” “went” is the verb and “across” is
an adverb modifying the verb. “Acrossed” is simply not a word.
Nucular vs Nuclear – A recent
president had problems with this one, so if it's one of your
grammatical gremlins, at least you're in good company. But it's still
“NEW-clee-er” and not “NEW-kyoo-ler.”
Hunnert vs Hundred – If you
express the numerical value of 10 x 10 as “hunnert,” welcome to
the country. That's primarily where people who can't say “hundred”
live.
Off-ten vs Often – Oh, this
one grinds my gears every time I hear it and I hear it more and more
“off-ten” these days. The word has been pronounced “OFF-en” –
with a silent “t” – practically since the beginning of time.
The downfall of the proper pronunciation began when common
English-speakers learned how to write. They saw that there was a
perfectly good “t” in there and, by golly, they were determined
to not let it go to waste. This is one of those “correct through
common usage” battles that purists – like me – usually lose.
But I vow to fight vigorously and “offen” for the proper
pronunciation, “common usage” be damned.
Febuary vs February – Look at
the letters, folks; there's a second “r” in there. It's
“FEB-roo-air-ee” not “FEB-yoo-air-ee.”
Liberry vs Library – Reference
“February” above. “LYE-brer-ee” not “LYE-berry.”
Athuhlete vs Athlete – This
word has only two syllables, not three. Although it may be more
verbally “ath-uh-LET-ic” to say “ATH-uh-leet,” it's
incorrect. Two syllables only: “ATH-leet.”
Spaded vs Spayed – When you
have your female dog or cat “fixed,” I can assure you the
veterinarian does not employ a shovel anywhere during the procedure.
Fluffy or Fido has been “spayed” not “spaded.”
Excape vs Escape – Personally,
I try to escape from people who say “excape” as expeditiously as
possible.
Expecially vs Especially – I
especially try to escape from people who say “expecially.”
Tenderhooks vs Tenterhooks –
Once upon a time, woven cloth was dried on a wooden frame called a
“tenter.” The fabric was attached to said frame by way of metal
hooks, called “tenterhooks.” At some point, a state of tension or
anxiety came to be associated with these hooks. “My situation has
left me on tenterhooks.” When these hooks got tenderized, I'm not
quite certain. But I am quite certain they are still “tenterhooks”
and not “tenderhooks.”
Upmost vs Utmost – Although it
is generally most desirable to move up, I still try my utmost to
avoid those who put forth their “upmost” effort.
Miniture vs Miniature – I know
there's a great movement afoot to make words shorter and more
compact, but please don't “min-ah-chur-ize” the word
“MIN-ee-ah-chur” by pronouncing it “MIN-ah-chur.” There are
four syllables there; please use them all.
Asterix vs Asterisk – In case
you don't know what it is, it's the little star-like symbol above the
“8” on your keypad. In case you don't know how to say it, it's
“AS-ter-isk,” not “AS-ter-ix.”
Verbage vs Verbiage – In a
effort to reduce excess “VER-bee-age,” I suppose many people take
to eliminating letters and syllables, thus reducing their potential
“VERB-age.” But it's still wrong to say it that way.
Mischievious vs Mischievous –
I go NUTS over this one! “Mischievous” derives from the
Anglo-Norman French “meschef.” In modern English, that's
“mischief.” When you turn it into an adjective, it becomes
“mischievous,” pronounced “MISS-che-vus.” However, as early
as the fifteenth century, an extra syllable snuck in there and turned
the word into “miss-CHEE-vee-us.” The OED considers
“mischievious” to be a “non-standard” spelling and a
“variant” usage, usually confined to regional, colloquial, or
humorous use. So I guess if you want to sound like a humorous hick,
it's okay to be “mischievious.”
Sherbert vs Sherbet – Only one
“r” here, good people. I'm sure Bert likes SURE-bet, but maybe he
should just call it “sorbet.” (And that's “sore-BAY,” not
“sore-BET.”)
Tact vs Tack – Both are fine
words, but they are not interchangeable. I know people who, when
referring to altering a course of action, change their “tact,”
and I suppose, if they think of it at all, they think of “tact” a
being a shortened form of “tactic.” None of that's true. The word
“tack” has a nautical origin. On a sailing ship, the “tack”
refers to the lower leading corner of the sail, which points the
direction the ship is heading. If you change course, you are changing
from one tack – or heading – to another, thereby “taking a
different tack.” You may be able to do so tactfully, but other than
that, the two words have nothing to do with one another.
Supposably vs Supposedly –
This isn't so much a case of mispronounced words as it is one of
misuse of similar but unrelated words. “Supposably” really is a
word, but one that has nothing to to with “supposedly.”
“Supposedly” refers to what one believes or assumes to be true;
“Supposedly, I will get a big raise next week.” “Supposably,”
on the other hand, refers to something that is capable of being
conceived; something that can be supposed. “I could supposably get
a big raise next week, if my boss isn't too cheap.” “Supposably”
isn't a very common expression in actual use, but its misuse in place
of “supposedly” is quite common.
Suit vs Suite – You hear this
all the time on TV; “Come in today and get your brand new new
bedroom suit.” But just because they say it on TV doesn't make it
correct. Unless you're talking about pajamas, I suppose. That might
be an appropriate example of a bedroom “suit.” A “suit” is a
set of coordinating or matching garments. A “suite,” in this
context, is a collection of similar or related things that can be
used together or for a common purpose; furniture, for example. A
“suite” can also be a set of rooms or a collection of musical
pieces considered as one composition. A “suit” is just a suit. I
guess you could hang it in the closet of the suite for which you have
purchased a new suite of furniture or you could wear it while
listening to a piano suite. Wouldn't that be sweet? But there's no
such thing as a “suit” of furniture – unless you plan to wear
your sofa and chairs.
Realator vs Realtor – Another
case where all you have to do is look at the word. Two syllables;
“real” and “tor.” There's no “a” in between.
Jewlery vs Jewelry – Back in
my radio days, we used to advertise for a place called “Jewelry
Warehouse.” I think I was the only one in the building who could
say “JEW-el-ree.” Everybody else stumbled over their tongues and
said, “JEW-ler-ree,” much to the client's displeasure.
Foilage vs Foliage – This one
cost a recent “Jeopardy” contestant a bundle. The word used to
describe the aggregate of leaves of one or more plants is pronounced
“FOE-lee-edge.” Some people try to shorten it to “FOE-ledge”
and some, like the “Jeopardy” guy, try to get away with
“FOYL-edge.” But Alex Trebek was too smart for him. No money for
you, loser.
Mute vs Moot – If I had a
nickel for every time I heard “mute” used instead of “moot.”
But I don't, so it's a moot point about which I will remain mute.
Irregardless vs Regardless –
Regardless of your proclivity toward making up delightful new words,
“irregardless” simply isn't one.
Ex cetera vs Et cetera – “Et
cetera” is literally Latin for “and the rest.” In common usage,
it is an expression that means “and other things” or “and so
forth.” In even more common usage, unfortunately, is “ex
cetera,” which means nothing because it isn't a real word or term.
Bonus: Calvary vs Cavalry –
“CAL-vary” is another name for “Golgotha,” ostensibly the
site of the crucifixion in Christian tradition. “CAV-al-ry” is a
military term for soldiers on horseback. The two are not
interchangeable. One does not send in the Calvary nor does one ascend
Mount Cavalry.
And finally, no matter how fast you
want it, there is no “x” in “espresso.” You might be
able to order your Italian coffee in the express lane, but it'll
still be “espresso.” I just had to throw something Italian in
there.
Now, friends, armed with your new-found
erudition, go out there and speak well. I'll be listening.
No comments:
Post a Comment