Dictionary beats computer for usage, some new words
In a recent meeting of our group discussion of Timely Topics, we hashed out the importance of language: purity versus evolving. A show of hands revealed that only a few regularly use a search engine, though many rely on computer spell checks.
It’s been my experience that mindlessly spellchecking one’s work often results in some bizarre errors.
When in doubt, I rely on my well-worn New World Dictionary of the American Language Second College Edition, last publishing date 1986 (Simon & Schuster, Inc.). New words, it was brought to my attention, wouldn’t be included there. Well, that’s true to a point, but I’m willing to trade that failing for proper usage of many words that media regularly misuse with apparent impunity.
Many newer dictionaries have accepted often-misused words as exchangeable, which must cause confusion among non-native English speakers and those young enough not to remember or care about accurate usage.
For instance, “further” and “farther” are now deemed exchangeable although “further” can mean additional or to a greater extent while “farther” is best used to measure distance.
“Reticent” means habitually silent but is often used instead of “reluctant” for unwilling to act.
“Staunch,” an adjective denoting firm support for an ally or a position is so regularly substituted for “stanch,” the verb meaning to stem the flow of something, that even some dictionaries list them as synonyms in the U.S. but not the U.K.
“Prescribe” is what the doctor advocates; “proscribe” is to ban, outlaw or forbid. The misuse here is understandable since “pro” generally means for rather than against.
Much confusion ensues when perfectly useful nouns are turned into really awful verbs.
The noun “barrage,” a heavy attack of artillery, blows or even words, makes a wretched verb compared with “bombard.” Young newsreaders just don’t seem to get this distinction.
Similarly, the noun “deluge,” meaning a flood, gets mixed up with “inundate,” the verb meaning “to flood.” Go “figure.”
“Insure” and “ensure” are both verbs but “insure” is what Aetna and Prudential do and “ensure” (not the supplement for seniors) is to secure an outcome, protect or make safe.
Two more verbs, “ferment” and “foment,” are likewise abused. Ferment, to excite, is best used with yeast or bacteria causing fermentation. But if inciting a riot, foment would be the better choice.
The adjectives “less,” meaning not as much in general, has pretty much edged out “fewer,” which should indicate individual (think countable) items or people.
And I’ve all but given up on the distinction between “from” and “than,” although originally “from” was to be used with different and “than” with other, as in “other than, different from.”
Children who are still grappling with subjective and objective pronouns can be forgiven for saying, “Me and Mary went.” (Even my grammar check just picked up on that one.) But many adults make essentially the same error when Mary and I are used as the objects of some action or other.
Anyway, one of the things that started me down this road was the recent use of the word “swingeing” (which my spell checker just changed to “swinging”) on recent television interviews concerning the British elections.
Appearing on Charlie Rose, Brits John Burns, Simon Schama and Martin Wolf all referred to the campaign as “swingeing.” Spell check may not recognize this as a word but New World does. However, it lists several possible meanings, both British colloquial, though one is considered archaic. So did the British journalists mean the campaign was “Huge, very large” or was it “Extremely good, first-rate” or was it even “Brutal?” I’ve asked all my British and Canadian friends but none has ever heard of the word. And since part of this word is “archaic” a newer dictionary probably wouldn’t help.
Well, I think the word is cool. And even my old dictionary lists “cool” (slang) as excellent. And, no, PHAT isn’t in there.
So, will the Liberal Democrats join the Tories leaving Labour (get over it, Spell Check, we’re talking about Brits) out in the cold? As of this writing Gordon Brown is still the prime minister. Will Conservative David Cameron be moving into No. 10 Downing Street?
And even if Liberal Democrat Nick Clegg and Cameron agree to form a coalition, new elections may be called within less than a year. Will they still call that swingeing?
I’ve had my old copy of New World repaired (it was totally falling apart) and I think I’ll keep referring to it instead of using the spell check and search engine.
But in a bid to the real new world, I now am using Google as a verb.