The Problem With English Majors
Posted by Andie Ryan Blog at 8/29/2009 12:35 AM 
Categories: Technical Detail,Writing Life
Tags: misplaced modifier elements of style malapropism strunk and white Jay Leno language misuse dangling participle transitive vampire Tonight Show karen elizabeth gordon askoxford
Categories: Technical Detail,Writing Life
Tags: misplaced modifier elements of style malapropism strunk and white Jay Leno language misuse dangling participle transitive vampire Tonight Show karen elizabeth gordon askoxford
I was talking with a friend the other day and we were remarking on the H1N1 virus and the resurgence of cold and flu bugs at a time of year we're not used to experiencing them. "And one of my friends got ammonia," he said.
Say what?
"Ammonia."
I no longer have the heart to correct this. I've misused language before, and no doubt will again. ("Only in dialogue!" comes a voice from offstage.) I used to think the phrase "for all intents and purposes" was actually "for all intensive purposes," and didn't get corrected until I started work after college as a technical writer, which is pretty scary all by itself. I feel better when I think I hadn't previously used the phrase in writing. I'm certain I haven't used it since out of sheer embarrassment. The phrase "spitting image," -- lovely thought -- is actually "spit and image." It's just that "spitting image" sounds better, more concise. Like "spitting distance."
The first draft of SHAKEDOWN to go to agents had at least thirty-one typos, including two instances where I wrote "your" when I meant to write "you're." But I can blame that on carelessness, sloppy editing. I know I know the difference. "Of course you do," the agents sniff behind their linen, Lions-monogrammed hankies.
"Irregardless" was a misuse I always recognized, commonly used but technically incorrect. It's "regardless," irrespective -- IRrespective -- of how it's used. Hey, maybe that's where the confusion came from. I mean, the source from which the confusion came.
Another friend, a world traveler, still orders "expresso" after dinner, but only to vex me.
I remember a sign in the laundry room of my first apartment. It read, "Please don't leave your clothes in the dryers. Others will want to use them." Now, the writer of that sign meant for tenants to take clothes out of the dryers promptly so others could use the dryers. I read that sign and thought people would be going after my clothes. Back then I could have outrun the other tenants in the building and gotten my clothes back. But I just got my AARP card and that's not as funny an observation as it used to be.
My favorite business sign -- more appropriate to present-day financial scandals -- is and always will be, from 25 years ago, "Real Estate Loans For Any Purpose." Come to think of it, maybe that wasn't an error. Maybe that particular bank was just ahead of the curve!
Can one correct these hairline linguistic fractures without offending one's friends and associates? I used to think so, but no more. Correcting someone else's language is risky business, unless you're hired or engaged for that purpose as a teacher or editor. You might risk being perceived as superior-minded. Lofty-thinking. Sober. You'll be branded too smart to have anything to do with.
I mean, too smart with whom to have anything...to do.
But something inside goes Ping! when I hear them. I want to say something, but somehow pointing out the correction seems analogous to the actions of a bratty little sister, a tattle-tale, a know-it-all whose linguistic sensibilities will get their payback -- count on it -- on the playground of life. You'll be avoided at parties if you're invited at all.
The problem with English majors is that the reflex never goes away. Misplaced modifiers and dangling participles abound in casual communication -- nails on a chalkboard. Jay Leno used to make fun of print errors in newspapers and magazines on The Tonight Show -- maybe this will carry over into his new, show. I got a kick out of these examples of mis-usage, and still look for them. But I watch in secret. It's a genetic defect. How is it possible that I enjoy these more than the bands? Now, I just suffer in silence.
If you think you're guilty of language misuse, there are a number of resources, other than Tonight Show reruns, that can provide a vocabulary refresher to help you distinguish words often confused in meaning because they sound the same or similar, or a visual depiction of phrases you think you may have misheard. Strunk and White did it in The Elements of Style, but check out Karen Elizabeth Gordon's The Transitive Vampire. You may also get a kick out of Googling "humorous malapropisms," or askoxford.com's list of commonly confused words (there are several competing lists), or the Lake Superior State University Banished Words List, including commentary. Best to check out the commonly confused words, and their correct spelling, before submitting a resume. Once you get the job, there's more flexibility.
I'll invite you to submit your favorite originals, and leave you with a favorite example of a dangling you-know-what. See if you can spot the error and correct it:
Reeling from the last editorial rejection, the Milk Duds grew more and more tempting.
And a musician who posted a sign on the front door to his shop, indicating his lunch break -- an old, but still worthy, play on words:
Bach in one hour. Offenbach sooner.
Say what?
"Ammonia."
I no longer have the heart to correct this. I've misused language before, and no doubt will again. ("Only in dialogue!" comes a voice from offstage.) I used to think the phrase "for all intents and purposes" was actually "for all intensive purposes," and didn't get corrected until I started work after college as a technical writer, which is pretty scary all by itself. I feel better when I think I hadn't previously used the phrase in writing. I'm certain I haven't used it since out of sheer embarrassment. The phrase "spitting image," -- lovely thought -- is actually "spit and image." It's just that "spitting image" sounds better, more concise. Like "spitting distance."
The first draft of SHAKEDOWN to go to agents had at least thirty-one typos, including two instances where I wrote "your" when I meant to write "you're." But I can blame that on carelessness, sloppy editing. I know I know the difference. "Of course you do," the agents sniff behind their linen, Lions-monogrammed hankies.
"Irregardless" was a misuse I always recognized, commonly used but technically incorrect. It's "regardless," irrespective -- IRrespective -- of how it's used. Hey, maybe that's where the confusion came from. I mean, the source from which the confusion came.
Another friend, a world traveler, still orders "expresso" after dinner, but only to vex me.
I remember a sign in the laundry room of my first apartment. It read, "Please don't leave your clothes in the dryers. Others will want to use them." Now, the writer of that sign meant for tenants to take clothes out of the dryers promptly so others could use the dryers. I read that sign and thought people would be going after my clothes. Back then I could have outrun the other tenants in the building and gotten my clothes back. But I just got my AARP card and that's not as funny an observation as it used to be.
My favorite business sign -- more appropriate to present-day financial scandals -- is and always will be, from 25 years ago, "Real Estate Loans For Any Purpose." Come to think of it, maybe that wasn't an error. Maybe that particular bank was just ahead of the curve!
Can one correct these hairline linguistic fractures without offending one's friends and associates? I used to think so, but no more. Correcting someone else's language is risky business, unless you're hired or engaged for that purpose as a teacher or editor. You might risk being perceived as superior-minded. Lofty-thinking. Sober. You'll be branded too smart to have anything to do with.
I mean, too smart with whom to have anything...to do.
But something inside goes Ping! when I hear them. I want to say something, but somehow pointing out the correction seems analogous to the actions of a bratty little sister, a tattle-tale, a know-it-all whose linguistic sensibilities will get their payback -- count on it -- on the playground of life. You'll be avoided at parties if you're invited at all.
The problem with English majors is that the reflex never goes away. Misplaced modifiers and dangling participles abound in casual communication -- nails on a chalkboard. Jay Leno used to make fun of print errors in newspapers and magazines on The Tonight Show -- maybe this will carry over into his new, show. I got a kick out of these examples of mis-usage, and still look for them. But I watch in secret. It's a genetic defect. How is it possible that I enjoy these more than the bands? Now, I just suffer in silence.
If you think you're guilty of language misuse, there are a number of resources, other than Tonight Show reruns, that can provide a vocabulary refresher to help you distinguish words often confused in meaning because they sound the same or similar, or a visual depiction of phrases you think you may have misheard. Strunk and White did it in The Elements of Style, but check out Karen Elizabeth Gordon's The Transitive Vampire. You may also get a kick out of Googling "humorous malapropisms," or askoxford.com's list of commonly confused words (there are several competing lists), or the Lake Superior State University Banished Words List, including commentary. Best to check out the commonly confused words, and their correct spelling, before submitting a resume. Once you get the job, there's more flexibility.
I'll invite you to submit your favorite originals, and leave you with a favorite example of a dangling you-know-what. See if you can spot the error and correct it:
Reeling from the last editorial rejection, the Milk Duds grew more and more tempting.
And a musician who posted a sign on the front door to his shop, indicating his lunch break -- an old, but still worthy, play on words:
Bach in one hour. Offenbach sooner.
Comments