(The "raising awareness" bit was a joke.) John Rentoul in the Independent has a list of clichés that are best avoided ("banned" in his article.) I admit to having used one or two of them and will try to do better. Sometimes these phrases might be used in jest such as "a raft of measures" which I think is a funny way to describe a list of things that people are intending to do to pretend that they are solving a problem.Is it better to read blogs or books? This is a futile discussion since people can read and write both. Many bloggers become better writers simply because they write so much: I am sure that my own writing has improved over the past few years. Bloggers are also instantly punished in their comment boxes for mistakes in spelling and grammar (there are not so many pedants in punctuation.)
If you write regularly, it is worth taking the time occasionally to consult some guides to good, clear English. The list of brief rules set out by George Orwell is still valuable:
- Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
- Never use a long word where a short one will do.
- If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
- Never use the passive where you can use the active.
- Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
- Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
So now let us put our noses to the grindstone, our shoulders to the wheel, develop a more vibrant community that is fit for purpose, create a sense of going forward, so that our quantum leap is leveraged exponentially on a daily basis that a step change be made possible for real people in the real world, forward planning be rolled out and the can be kicked down the road. And yet, and yet ...
Photo credit: gwilmore
19 comments:
Sadly, Father, the true irony of the last paragraph of your post is that it reads much like the vision statement of most American Corporations.
Fail! you completely forgot to verb. I don't see a single example of "accessing" the internet, or "journeying" together towards a common future.
Try journaling for a while, it might help.
"I am sure that my own writing has improved over the past few years."
True. I need to start blogging in French...
NC
We bloggers can also touch base on the left field. Then, a ball park figure may emerge which could satisfy the elephant in the room.
Cool and wicked innit?
Sometimes these phrases might be used in jest such as "a raft of measures" which I think is a funny way to describe a list of things that people are intending to do to pretend that they are solving a problem.
Tut, tut. Solving a problem? ‘Solving problems’ is very old-fashioned. We don’t solve problems any more. We now “address issues”?
Yuck!
Your Grace,
This has been going on since time immemorial (!).
I would respectfully refer ypu to "The King's English" (Fowler, 1st pub 1906) and "The Complete Plain Words" (Gowers, 1st pub 1954).
When all is said and done, and this is hardly rocket science, the bottom line is that when the rubber hits the road and we see the light at the end of the tunnel, we can get the show on the road.
Hmmm. While the overuse of clichés can be annoying, following some of the other recommendations could result in very boring reading. We might end up communicating in monosyllables – akin to the txting of the younger generation. LOL!
Also , I’m not averse to the occasional mot just or bon mot to elucidate a point or spice up the dialogue. And if I don’t understand the expression, well there are dictionaries for that – or even Wikipedia, God help us! Following Mr. Rentoul’s rules may serve to reduce communication to the Lowest Common Denominator – which may have application in Maths, but is detrimental to spirited verbal or written intercourse.
De gustibus…
Don't forget to bring your blue sky thinking to the table so that you can progressively grow your blog forward into the future...
strawbrick - I had the good fortune to be brought up on those classics. One of our English teachers used to go through passages in "The Complete Plain Words"; one of those classes I still remember was when he read out parts of newspaper headlines and we had to fill in the cliché. I have a copy of Fowler's "The King's English": Orwell was really summarising the first chapter of that book. "The same author's "Modern English Usage" is also helpful. I should consult it more.
There are far worse abuses of the English language than the use of cliches. The ones that I partuicularly dislike include:
different to,
different than,
use of "their" for his or her,
the ubiquitous use of the word "stuff",
was stood,
inappropriately placed adverbs.
Fowler's "Modern English Usage" begins the article "Different" as follows:
"1. That d. can only be followed by from and not by to is a SUPERSTITION. To is 'found in writers of all ages' (OED)..."
I knew to look up Fowler because I remember having this argument with some fellow undergraduates in 1979. I used to use "different to" and "different than" as often as possible to annoy them. ("Different than" is found in Newman if my memory serves me correctly.)
On using "their" for his or her, Fowler refers to his article on "they" where he again quotes the OED which has examples of Fielding, Goldsmith Thackeray, and Ruskin. The OED says that it is frowned on by grammarians and Fowler thinks that few modern writers would flout them so conspicuously.
I'm glad you brung up this topic. My tam will hammer out a resonse.
"I am sure that my own writing has improved over the past few years."
It's not for me to say but yes, I think that blogging has improved my English (a foreign language to me anyway).
Punctuation does remain a problem, though. Inspired by your observations, I have now ordered a couple of books on the subject.
Mundabor
A new title for your blog then, Father? ;0)
Very clever.
All words and phrases are fossilized figures of speech. If you really followed Orwell's dictum, you couldn't write anything in any language.
Fowler is demonstrably wrong on pretty much every point, if followed as an English grammar guide instead of a stylebook. The folks at Language Log can fill you in on details. (Or you could consult the huge descriptive grammar of English tome from the Cambridge linguistics folks.)
Orwell's "rules" are not written as absolute commands - they are a guide to what is preferable if a person is trying to write well ("where... if it is possible ..." etc. I am sure he would consider his last rule to be the most important.
Fowler's book is on "usage" as the title says: it is not intended as a formal grammar - he refers to 'grammarians' as engaged on a different task from his. He's not wrong about the writers he cites using the expressions he refuses to condemn.
"If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out."
This strikes me as being funny. The reason, always should be cut out.
Post a Comment