Time and banned words

[Baker, John]

I disagree with the suggestion that lists like these show that some people are paying attention to what and how they're speaking.  To the contrary, they almost invariably suggest to me that the compiler is paying no real attention. 
 
In the examples cited below, shovel-ready, transparent/transparency, tweet, and app all have concrete, useful meanings.  For example, financial transactions are said to be transparent when key information about them is immediately available to the public.  Thus, trading in stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange is transparent, because the price and volume are immediately reported on the consolidated tape, while trading in swaps is not, because there is no similar reporting process.  The objection to these terms really is that the objectors don't want to hear about the topics any more.
 
Czar I personally don't like, because it almost invariably overstates the real authority of whatever office is referred to.  But, as Jon notes, it's great for headline-writers, so I don't see it going anywhere soon.  
 
 
John Baker
 
 

________________________________

From: American Dialect Society on behalf of Jonathan Lighter
Sent: Mon 1/18/2010 12:31 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Time and banned words



These annual lists are hardly more than publicity stunts.  Some of the words
are moderately obnxious because they're overused unnecessarily to the point
of cliche'.  Those who use them, apparently, think they're being clever, but
we know better.

Others, like "Tweet," are nearly indispensible, just new and popular.

"Czar" has been around for decades (headline writers love it).  Why should
it be "banned" now?

All very foolish, and I think that more of the publications reprinting the
list are laughing at it than with it.

JL


On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:37 AM, David Barnhart <dbarnhart at highlands.com>wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       David Barnhart <dbarnhart at HIGHLANDS.COM>
> Subject:      Time and banned words
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The Jan. 18th issue of Time magazine has a column under the "Short List"
> (p.
> 67) entitled "Say No More: 2010's Banned Words."
>
>
>
> I'm sure most of us who watch language day-to-day shudder at the audacity
> of
> some in academia to suppose they can prompt people to forgo the use of such
> terms as:
>
> _shovel-ready_
>
> _transparent/transparency_
>
> _Czar_
>
> _Tweet_, the verb
>
> _app_
>
> _stimulus_
>
> And _Obama_-.
>
>
>
> The only thing that can be said for this list (year-to-year) is that some
> people are paying attention to what and how they're speaking.
> Prescriptivity is such a fruitless undertaking except for momentary
> amusement.  Are the practitioners of such prescriptive activity infringing
> on the right of free speech?  Perhaps somebody ought to sue them.
>
>
>
> DKB
>
>
>
> Barnhart at highlands.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org <http://www.americandialect.org/> 
>



--
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org <http://www.americandialect.org/> 

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org