EDITORIAL: 25 Common Words That You’ve Got Wrong
Monday, 8 December 2014 14:15![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ariestess posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
fandom_grammarGetting words wrong is like a rite of passage when you're first learning to speak a language, regardless of whether you're a child with your mother tongue or an adult learning a second language. You learn from your mistakes and grow more proficient in the language. In "25 Common Words That You've Got Wrong", Joseph Hindy discusses twenty-five commonly used words that he claims aren't being used correctly. Or maybe it's better to say that they're not being used to their original meanings, as he describes the popular meaning of some words as an error next to the "correct" original, and sometimes archaic, meaning for each word. Hindy explains how he believes the errors may have come about, as well as how to fix them, in a conversational, non-accusatory tone. That he also attempts to connect with his readers by admitting to misusing some of these words only makes the article more relatable.
For the most part, I agree with the variety of words Hindy used here. What I have some issues with is the assertion that only the original and oftentimes archaic definition of the word should be used. Language is ever-evolving and new words get formed all the time -- for example, how else would we have words like humongous? -- and added to the lexicon. This should also allow for the inclusion of newer, colloquial meanings for these same words. The dictionary is a better source than this article for what the currently approved definitions for words are, and I suggest checking it for individual words you are questioning.
Numbers four, "conversate", and fourteen, "irregardless", are actually major pet peeves of mine, as I feel like they're only used in the "everybody's doing it, so it must be okay" kind of thinking. Another word of this kind in the list is number twenty-two, "literally". And yes, despite it being a personal pet peeve, I find myself using the colloquial meaning of "literally" because I get caught up in everyone else around me using it that way. I mentally correct them, and then roll my eyes at myself when I use it incorrectly.
I can straight up admit that I misuse peruse and nauseous regularly. I was surprised by the definitions of enormity and decimate, though I should have known the latter. To be honest, I don't think I actually use either very often, so am not surprised that I have shifted to their more colloquial meanings. My personal rule of thumb is that if you don't know what a word means, look it up before you use it. Yes, I break my own rule occasionally where words are concerned, but it's something I try to follow. It's also something that I often recommend to other people.
But I must say that the best part of the whole article is the comments section. Normally, I don't touch the comments section of an article because of the vitriol spewed on both sides. Watching people debate the evolution of language always fascinates me.
It really does boil down to just how colloquial or literal we want to get in our use of language. For the most part, people speak and write more colloquially, but hopefully they'll also have at least a passing understanding of the original meanings of the words they're using.
For the most part, I agree with the variety of words Hindy used here. What I have some issues with is the assertion that only the original and oftentimes archaic definition of the word should be used. Language is ever-evolving and new words get formed all the time -- for example, how else would we have words like humongous? -- and added to the lexicon. This should also allow for the inclusion of newer, colloquial meanings for these same words. The dictionary is a better source than this article for what the currently approved definitions for words are, and I suggest checking it for individual words you are questioning.
Numbers four, "conversate", and fourteen, "irregardless", are actually major pet peeves of mine, as I feel like they're only used in the "everybody's doing it, so it must be okay" kind of thinking. Another word of this kind in the list is number twenty-two, "literally". And yes, despite it being a personal pet peeve, I find myself using the colloquial meaning of "literally" because I get caught up in everyone else around me using it that way. I mentally correct them, and then roll my eyes at myself when I use it incorrectly.
I can straight up admit that I misuse peruse and nauseous regularly. I was surprised by the definitions of enormity and decimate, though I should have known the latter. To be honest, I don't think I actually use either very often, so am not surprised that I have shifted to their more colloquial meanings. My personal rule of thumb is that if you don't know what a word means, look it up before you use it. Yes, I break my own rule occasionally where words are concerned, but it's something I try to follow. It's also something that I often recommend to other people.
But I must say that the best part of the whole article is the comments section. Normally, I don't touch the comments section of an article because of the vitriol spewed on both sides. Watching people debate the evolution of language always fascinates me.
It really does boil down to just how colloquial or literal we want to get in our use of language. For the most part, people speak and write more colloquially, but hopefully they'll also have at least a passing understanding of the original meanings of the words they're using.
