|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 15, 2021 14:51:35 GMT
Since 1976 the Lake Superior State University in Michigan has issued an annual list of banished words and phrases to “uphold, protect, and support excellence in language by encouraging avoidance of words and terms that are overworked, redundant, oxymoronic, clichéd, illogical, nonsensical — and otherwise ineffective, baffling, or irritating.” The annual list is compiled based on nominations from the American public. Their website, linked below, provides a complete list of all banished expressions, so consult that before making your noms. This year’s list is heavy of COVID-19 phraseology. While acknowledging that the pandemic is a tragedy, many feel that new ways of description are needed. “COVID-19” and “social distancing” are thrown in with “we’re all in this together," “in an abundance of caution” and “in these uncertain times” on the school’s light-hearted list of banned words and phrases for 2021. Out of more than 1,450 nominations sent to the school, about 250 words and terms suggested for banishment due to overuse, misuse or uselessness had something to do with the virus. Seven of the 10 selected are connected to the virus, with “COVID-19” leading the way. “Unprecedented,” which was banished back in 2002, has been restored to the list. “To be sure, COVID-19 is unprecedented in wreaking havoc and destroying lives,” Banished Words List committee members said Thursday in a release. “But so is the overreliance on ‘unprecedented’ to frame things, so it has to go, too.” So far, more than 1,000 words or phrases have made the list. Nominations come from across the U.S. and a number of other countries. Joining past inductees such as “absolutely,” “BFF," “covfefe,” and “yuh know” are: — COVID-19 (COVID, coronavirus, Rona). “A large number of nominators are clearly resentful of the virus and how it has overtaken our vocabulary,” the committee wrote. “No matter how necessary or socially and medically useful these words are, the committee cannot help but wish we could banish them along with the virus itself.” — Social distancing. “This phrase is useful, as wearing a mask and keeping your distance have a massive effect on preventing the spread of infection,” members said. “But we’d be lying if we said we weren’t ready for this phrase to become ‘useless.’” — We’re all in this together. — In an abundance of caution (various phrasings). — In these uncertain times (various phrasings). — Pivot. “Reporters, commentators, talking heads, and others from the media reference how everyone must adapt to the coronavirus through contactless delivery, virtual learning, curbside pickup, video conferencing, remote working, and other urgent readjustments,” the committee wrote. “That’s all true and vital. But basketball players pivot; let’s keep it that way.” — Unprecedented. — Karen. “What began as an anti-racist critique of the behavior of white women in response to Black and brown people has become a misogynist umbrella term for critiquing the perceived overemotional behavior of women,” the committee said. — Sus, short for “suspicious.” — I know, right? Just remember before saying any of these things that people are listening so you could be reported on the whistleblower’s website and face heavy penalties. www.lssu.edu/traditions/banishedwords/ |
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Sept 15, 2021 15:26:36 GMT
Since 1976 the Lake Superior State University in Michigan has issued an annual list of banished words and phrases to “uphold, protect, and support excellence in language by encouraging avoidance of words and terms that are overworked, redundant, oxymoronic, clichéd, illogical, nonsensical — and otherwise ineffective, baffling, or irritating.” The annual list is compiled based on nominations from the American public. Their website, linked below, provides a complete list of all banished expressions, so consult that before making your noms. This year’s list is heavy of COVID-19 phraseology. While acknowledging that the pandemic is a tragedy, many feel that new ways of description are needed. “COVID-19” and “social distancing” are thrown in with “we’re all in this together," “in an abundance of caution” and “in these uncertain times” on the school’s light-hearted list of banned words and phrases for 2021. Out of more than 1,450 nominations sent to the school, about 250 words and terms suggested for banishment due to overuse, misuse or uselessness had something to do with the virus. Seven of the 10 selected are connected to the virus, with “COVID-19” leading the way. “Unprecedented,” which was banished back in 2002, has been restored to the list. “To be sure, COVID-19 is unprecedented in wreaking havoc and destroying lives,” Banished Words List committee members said Thursday in a release. “But so is the overreliance on ‘unprecedented’ to frame things, so it has to go, too.” So far, more than 1,000 words or phrases have made the list. Nominations come from across the U.S. and a number of other countries. Joining past inductees such as “absolutely,” “BFF," “covfefe,” and “yuh know” are: — COVID-19 (COVID, coronavirus, Rona). “A large number of nominators are clearly resentful of the virus and how it has overtaken our vocabulary,” the committee wrote. “No matter how necessary or socially and medically useful these words are, the committee cannot help but wish we could banish them along with the virus itself.” — Social distancing. “This phrase is useful, as wearing a mask and keeping your distance have a massive effect on preventing the spread of infection,” members said. “But we’d be lying if we said we weren’t ready for this phrase to become ‘useless.’” — We’re all in this together. — In an abundance of caution (various phrasings). — In these uncertain times (various phrasings). — Pivot. “Reporters, commentators, talking heads, and others from the media reference how everyone must adapt to the coronavirus through contactless delivery, virtual learning, curbside pickup, video conferencing, remote working, and other urgent readjustments,” the committee wrote. “That’s all true and vital. But basketball players pivot; let’s keep it that way.” — Unprecedented. — Karen. “What began as an anti-racist critique of the behavior of white women in response to Black and brown people has become a misogynist umbrella term for critiquing the perceived overemotional behavior of women,” the committee said.— Sus, short for “suspicious.” — I know, right? Just remember before saying any of these things that people are listening so you could be reported on the whistleblower’s website and face heavy penalties. www.lssu.edu/traditions/banishedwords/As far as i have seen its mostly extremely rude and obnoxious women who get called Karen, not women who are a bit overemotional.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Sept 15, 2021 16:22:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 15, 2021 17:27:48 GMT
As far as i have seen its mostly extremely rude and obnoxious women who get called Karen, not women who are a bit overemotional. Early on in the "Karen" thing I saw a couple of stories about male equivalents (a Kevin) but that fell away quickly. The point is: whether it is confronting a minority person or being pushy in a store, demanding to see the manager, it is always a women. It is Karen. Maybe "overemotional" is not a very good descriptor (and not even a good word, should be "overly emotional"). Perhaps, rude and obnoxious is more like it, but it is always aimed at women. Time to end it.
|
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 15, 2021 17:34:17 GMT
As far as i have seen its mostly extremely rude and obnoxious women who get called Karen, not women who are a bit overemotional. Early on in the "Karen" thing I saw a couple of stories about male equivalents (a Kevin) but that fell away quickly. The point is: whether it is confronting a minority person or being pushy in a store, demanding to see the manager, it is always a women. It is Karen. Maybe "overemotional" is not a very good descriptor (and not even a good word, should be "overly emotional"). Perhaps, rude and obnoxious is more like it, but it is always aimed at women. Time to end it. I don't like the word, nor the attitude behind it. The implication is that any white female who has a problem with a 'person of color' (another term I cannot stand; as George Carlin once noted, it's simply a convoluted way of saying "colored people") is invariably some pampered, silly bitch, probably a racist, definitely not to be taken seriously. Her issue may be a legitimate one, but by applying the Karen moniker, it dismisses and dehumanizes her--and on what? Why, on the basis of skin color and gender of course!
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Sept 16, 2021 5:52:58 GMT
All the Karens I've known were really nice, and I feel bad for them that pop culture has used their name to denote entitled white suburban housewives. Why don't we ban calling things racist just because the people are different colors, that's the opposite of progressivism.
Sus is from a game, I've never heard it.
Social distancing, like comorbidity, isn't new, but has reentered the common vernacular.
How about the phrase, Living your best life, let's dump that one.
Or on movie forums, Flawed; as if there were movies universally agreed to be flawless.
|
|
|
|
Post by marianne48 on Sept 16, 2021 8:50:24 GMT
I'm annoyed by the dropping of the word "of":
"Well, we didn't go on vacation this year, because COVID."
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 16, 2021 11:54:41 GMT
I'd particularly like to see "gaslighting" retired from use, at least by those people who don't seem to know what it means. It's been years since I've heard it used to describe anything but garden variety bullshitting. That ain't it. It's derived from a 1939 play - and two subsequent films of the same title - referring to a specific sort of psychological manipulation intended to make its victim doubt their own sanity.
How many times have we heard things like, "For four years, the Trump administration gaslighted the nation..." Ha. I put it to anyone: when you heard Trump, or Conway or Huckabee-Sanders or any of the others telling their whoppers, did you doubt your sanity?
Or were you doubting theirs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 18, 2021 18:02:26 GMT
Early on in the "Karen" thing I saw a couple of stories about male equivalents (a Kevin) but that fell away quickly. The point is: whether it is confronting a minority person or being pushy in a store, demanding to see the manager, it is always a women. It is Karen. Maybe "overemotional" is not a very good descriptor (and not even a good word, should be "overly emotional"). Perhaps, rude and obnoxious is more like it, but it is always aimed at women. Time to end it. I don't like the word, nor the attitude behind it. The implication is that any white female who has a problem with a 'person of color' (another term I cannot stand; as George Carlin once noted, it's simply a convoluted way of saying "colored people") is invariably some pampered, silly bitch, probably a racist, definitely not to be taken seriously. Her issue may be a legitimate one, but by applying the Karen moniker, it dismisses and dehumanizes her--and on what? Why, on the basis of skin color and gender of course! It's so sad that the name Karen is now a word that represents privileged and obnoxious white women. Some people even intend to use it refer to racist white women. I feel sad because people who thoughtlessly use the word are being insensitive to all the people named Karen. Some are trying to paint white women as racist in general if they are not in 100% adherence to political correctness. And my favourite foreign language singer of all time is none other Karen Carpenter. So all in all I hate that the word Karen is being used thoughtlessly.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 25, 2021 4:30:18 GMT
I'd particularly like to see "gaslighting" retired from use, at least by those people who don't seem to know what it means. It's been years since I've heard it used to describe anything but garden variety bullshitting. That ain't it. It's derived from a 1939 play - and two subsequent films of the same title - referring to a specific sort of psychological manipulation intended to make its victim doubt their own sanity. How many times have we heard things like, "For four years, the Trump administration gaslighted the nation..." Ha. I put it to anyone: when you heard Trump, or Conway or Huckabee-Sanders or any of the others telling their whoppers, did you doubt your sanity? Or were you doubting theirs? Even more basically, blaming the victim. "It is your fault that happened" when it really wasn't. "If you hadn't been drunk/dressed that that/in that place nothing would have happened." I checked the archive and "gaslighting" has not been banished yet. You should submit it for consideration at the link in the O.P. I think it is worthy. Then, if you hear anyone using the word, you can make a citizen's arrest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 25, 2021 22:30:12 GMT
mikef6Citizen's arrest, huh? I guess I can say I'm not after power or punishment; only literacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 30, 2021 3:21:55 GMT
I'd particularly like to see "gaslighting" retired from use, at least by those people who don't seem to know what it means. It's been years since I've heard it used to describe anything but garden variety bullshitting. That ain't it. It's derived from a 1939 play - and two subsequent films of the same title - referring to a specific sort of psychological manipulation intended to make its victim doubt their own sanity. How many times have we heard things like, "For four years, the Trump administration gaslighted the nation..." Ha. I put it to anyone: when you heard Trump, or Conway or Huckabee-Sanders or any of the others telling their whoppers, did you doubt your sanity? Or were you doubting theirs? Even more basically, blaming the victim. "It is your fault that happened" when it really wasn't. "If you hadn't been drunk/dressed that that/in that place nothing would have happened." I checked the archive and "gaslighting" has not been banished yet. You should submit it for consideration at the link in the O.P. I think it is worthy. Then, if you hear anyone using the word, you can make a citizen's arrest. I'm going to challenge you on that one, Mike. Partly because it is a term used in psychology and is a characteristic of narcissism. And partly because of the use of the phrase, 'doubt their own sanity' that Doghouse mentioned in his post. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/communication-success/201704/7-stages-gaslighting-in-relationshipAnd this might be splitting hairs, but the author goes on to say: A lot of people still believe the Big Lie, and other Trump-originated crap. They made his lies their reality. On a personal level, as a child, I was gaslighted for years by a narcissist (a family member) and it damaged my self-esteem, nearly wiped out my sense of self preservation - this person's slightest whim was more important than the fact that I was sick and needed to be at home in bed, but couldn't because her issue was more important than my health. I had to stay with her to take care of her need, instead of going home as I should have to appropriately take care of my need. That's just one instance. This person convinced me that everyone else's needs (especially hers) were more important than mine - if I dared take care of myself first, I was a bad, selfish person. No matter what I did for this person, it was never enough. I was always expected to sacrifice my needs or wants in favor of this person's needs or wants. I had no self-esteem until I met and married my husband. He provided positive feedback, told me I had a talent and encouraged me to develop it, protected me when the narcissist tried to manipulate me again. He was my most avid supporter, and many times he put my needs before his own. He was my fiercest advocate when I was being treated for cancer. He wanted me to be in remission. Sadly, a few years after I went into remission, he passed away due to a terminal illness. I did for him what he did for me - I was his advocate - but his condition was terminal when diagnosed. I still find myself doubting my own abilities and minimizing my accomplishments, but then I think of him, and what he would say. I had a piece of artwork that I submitted to a national magazine in a challenge, and my entry was published in the top 20 submissions. He would have been showing that magazine to anyone who would stand still long enough, bursting with pride in my accomplishment; the narcissist looked at it and said, "that's pretty', and the subject was changed. True gaslighting can be very damaging, and it isn't used just to make people think they are insane, it is used to control other people's perceptions of reality and devalue their own critical thinking skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 30, 2021 4:32:59 GMT
Even more basically, blaming the victim. "It is your fault that happened" when it really wasn't. "If you hadn't been drunk/dressed that that/in that place nothing would have happened." I checked the archive and "gaslighting" has not been banished yet. You should submit it for consideration at the link in the O.P. I think it is worthy. Then, if you hear anyone using the word, you can make a citizen's arrest. I'm going to challenge you on that one, Mike. Partly because it is a term used in psychology and is a characteristic of narcissism. And partly because of the use of the phrase, 'doubt their own sanity' that Doghouse mentioned in his post. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/communication-success/201704/7-stages-gaslighting-in-relationshipAnd this might be splitting hairs, but the author goes on to say: A lot of people still believe the Big Lie, and other Trump-originated crap. They made his lies their reality. On a personal level, as a child, I was gaslighted for years by a narcissist (a family member) and it damaged my self-esteem, nearly wiped out my sense of self preservation - this person's slightest whim was more important than the fact that I was sick and needed to be at home in bed, but couldn't because her issue was more important than my health. I had to stay with her to take care of her need, instead of going home as I should have to appropriately take care of my need. That's just one instance. This person convinced me that everyone else's needs (especially hers) were more important than mine - if I dared take care of myself first, I was a bad, selfish person. No matter what I did for this person, it was never enough. I was always expected to sacrifice my needs or wants in favor of this person's needs or wants. I had no self-esteem until I met and married my husband. He provided positive feedback, told me I had a talent and encouraged me to develop it, protected me when the narcissist tried to manipulate me again. He was my most avid supporter, and many times he put my needs before his own. He was my fiercest advocate when I was being treated for cancer. He wanted me to be in remission. Sadly, a few years after I went into remission, he passed away due to a terminal illness. I did for him what he did for me - I was his advocate - but his condition was terminal when diagnosed. I still find myself doubting my own abilities and minimizing my accomplishments, but then I think of him, and what he would say. I had a piece of artwork that I submitted to a national magazine in a challenge, and my entry was published in the top 20 submissions. He would have been showing that magazine to anyone who would stand still long enough, bursting with pride in my accomplishment; the narcissist looked at it and said, "that's pretty', and the subject was changed. True gaslighting can be very damaging, and it isn't used just to make people think they are insane, it is used to control other people's perceptions of reality and devalue their own critical thinking skills. Thanks for that in-depth essay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Oct 1, 2021 0:50:01 GMT
rachelcarson1953 - Along with mikef6, I want to offer my thanks for your observances, examinations, amplifications and personal experiences. They were of much interest. Although I was being a bit flip in my last reply to him, there was sincerity behind it when I said my only interest was literacy. It dismays me to witness the gradual disintegration of the English language, in spite of its many puzzling inconsistencies and arbitrary dos and don'ts (anyone learning it as a second one has both my pity and admiration). It grates on my nerves when, for example, broadcast and print journalists, commentators, authors and the like who should know better utter phrases like, "There's dozens of reasons for..." or "There's millions of people who..." There is reasons? There is people? Aaack! And I'm equally discouraged to see perfectly good terminology, conveying specific meaning, become diluted through mis- or over-use. I don't mean to harp too much on politics, but it's in that arena that the damage to "gaslight[ing]" has been done. As you rightly observed, "A lot of people still believe the Big Lie, and other Trump-originated crap. They made his lies their reality." In light of your personal experiences with a toxic relationship and Psychology Today's description of gaslighting as "a severe form of mind-control and psychological abuse," the effect of Trumpist snake-oil is just the opposite of "los[ing] [one's] sense of perception, identity, and self-worth." Those buying into it instead feel it not only gives them those senses of perception, identity and self-worth, it empowers them, conferring senses of strength and action rather than passive weakness. They feel they are the only true patriots, granted license to everything from harassing mask-wearers, to disrupting school board meetings to beating on police and smashing their way into and invading the U.S. Capitol Building. Don't like the way things are? Make enough noise, throw big enough tantrums and commit enough violence to get your way by force. There's no doubt that the messaging inspiring such behavior is a form of mind-control, and it may ultimately prove abusive to those willingly submitting to it...if not in a way they expect. But there are already two very appropriate words identifying that messaging: lying and demagoguery. And all of a sudden, I feel like that guy who made those wailing YouTube videos about poor, put-upon Britney Spears a few years back: "Leeeeeeeave 'gaslighting' allllooooooone!"
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Oct 1, 2021 18:50:23 GMT
rachelcarson1953 - Along with mikef6 , I want to offer my thanks for your observances, examinations, amplifications and personal experiences. They were of much interest. Although I was being a bit flip in my last reply to him, there was sincerity behind it when I said my only interest was literacy. It dismays me to witness the gradual disintegration of the English language, in spite of its many puzzling inconsistencies and arbitrary dos and don'ts (anyone learning it as a second one has both my pity and admiration). It grates on my nerves when, for example, broadcast and print journalists, commentators, authors and the like who should know better utter phrases like, "There's dozens of reasons for..." or "There's millions of people who..."
There is reasons? There is people? Aaack! And I'm equally discouraged to see perfectly good terminology, conveying specific meaning, become diluted through mis- or over-use. I don't mean to harp too much on politics, but it's in that arena that the damage to "gaslight[ing]" has been done. As you rightly observed, "A lot of people still believe the Big Lie, and other Trump-originated crap. They made his lies their reality." In light of your personal experiences with a toxic relationship and Psychology Today's description of gaslighting as "a severe form of mind-control and psychological abuse," the effect of Trumpist snake-oil is just the opposite of "los[ing] [one's] sense of perception, identity, and self-worth." Those buying into it instead feel it not only gives them those senses of perception, identity and self-worth, it empowers them, conferring senses of strength and action rather than passive weakness. They feel they are the only true patriots, granted license to everything from harassing mask-wearers, to disrupting school board meetings to beating on police and smashing their way into and invading the U.S. Capitol Building. Don't like the way things are? Make enough noise, throw big enough tantrums and commit enough violence to get your way by force. There's no doubt that the messaging inspiring such behavior is a form of mind-control, and it may ultimately prove abusive to those willingly submitting to it...if not in a way they expect. But there are already two very appropriate words identifying that messaging: lying and demagoguery. And all of a sudden, I feel like that guy who made those wailing YouTube videos about poor, put-upon Britney Spears a few years back: "Leeeeeeeave 'gaslighting' allllooooooone!" I've been a professional proofreader, off and on, for most of my adult life, so bad grammar and misspelling make my teeth clench too! As for the political side of this, I am still reeling in disbelief at what America has come to. The lying demagogue who is behind all this needs to go to jail. Some decades back, he would have been shot as a traitor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Oct 1, 2021 19:59:43 GMT
I've been a professional proofreader, off and on, for most of my adult life, so bad grammar and misspelling make my teeth clench too! As for the political side of this, I am still reeling in disbelief at what America has come to. The lying demagogue who is behind all this needs to go to jail. Some decades back, he would have been shot as a traitor. I'm encouraged to know we have a pro here. I don't spend much time on this board but, if you ever catch me committing grammatical sloppiness (and I know I do), you'll find me grateful for any corrections you're inclined to offer. 
|
|
|
|
Post by ellynmacg on Oct 2, 2021 5:16:44 GMT
Another word that has been misused to the point of being abused is "misinformation." For Pete's sake, if commenters are posting things they know are inaccurate, misleading, or just plain lies, with the intention of doing harm, what they are posting is NOT
"misinformation"! That garbage is "disinformation" ...though sometimes I think it should be spelled "dysinformation" a la "dysfunctional."
Only when someone is innocently--i.e., without malice--passing along info without knowing it is false or misleading can it, or should it, be called "misinformation".
Simply put--
Bad intelligence repeated without bad intention: MISinformation.
Bad intelligence repeated with bad intention: DISinformation.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Oct 2, 2021 20:36:44 GMT
I've been a professional proofreader, off and on, for most of my adult life, so bad grammar and misspelling make my teeth clench too! As for the political side of this, I am still reeling in disbelief at what America has come to. The lying demagogue who is behind all this needs to go to jail. Some decades back, he would have been shot as a traitor. What is the informal contraction for "there are?" "There're millions of people...." Probably should not be used in broadcast news, even if in speaking. If I tried to say that, I would most assuredly sound drunk! I try to avoid contractions, simply because people talk so sloppily these days, it's hard to figure out what's being said anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Oct 2, 2021 21:37:52 GMT
What is the informal contraction for "there are?" "There're millions of people...." Probably should not be used in broadcast news, even if in speaking. If I tried to say that, I would most assuredly sound drunk! I try to avoid contractions, simply because people talk so sloppily these days, it's hard to figure out what's being said anymore. I considered the question, but thought it best to wait for you to weigh in first (it was directed to you, after all). It's my understanding that "there're" is perfectly correct, just as "they're" and "we're" are. And it's my guess that, whether used in broadcast or private conversation, most listeners would hear it as "there are" anyway. But either way, it's no more work to say "there are" than to say 'there're (same number of syllables), and is, to my ear, preferable to "there's," which is incorrect no matter how you slice it and despite its ubiquity. I had the crazy thought about twenty-five years ago that written online communication would lead to broadening and refinement of language skills that had fallen by the wayside. LOL! No wut I mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Oct 3, 2021 14:09:38 GMT
If I tried to say that, I would most assuredly sound drunk! I try to avoid contractions, simply because people talk so sloppily these days, it's hard to figure out what's being said anymore. I considered the question, but thought it best to wait for you to weigh in first (it was directed to you, after all). It's my understanding that "there're" is perfectly correct, just as "they're" and "we're" are. And it's my guess that, whether used in broadcast or private conversation, most listeners would hear it as "there are" anyway. But either way, it's no more work to say "there are" than to say 'there're (same number of syllables), and is, to my ear, preferable to "there's," which is incorrect no matter how you slice it and despite its ubiquity. I had the crazy thought about twenty-five years ago that written online communication would lead to broadening and refinement of language skills that had fallen by the wayside. LOL! No wut I mean? I had that same crazy thought myself; seeing words correctly spelled with no little red spellcheck underlined words would be a positive reinforcement, and people would read what they wrote and perhaps refine a thought or clarify an idea... 
|
|
