Last month the OUP announced its word of the year (WOTY) for 2010 - 'big society', which beat 'double-dip' and 'vuvuzela'.
BBC News also recently produced a list of words used in politics during the past year. The list includes 'bigotgate', 'brokeback coalition' and 'ginger rodent'.
Over in the US, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary announced the top ten words of 2010. Based on the number of searches online, the top three were: 'austerity', 'pragmatic' and 'moratorium'.
In January the American Dialect Society will announce its own WOTY list for 2010. One of the judges, linguist Ben Zimmer, has highlighted 'junk', shellacking' and 'hactivism' as possible contenders. If you're interested, you can listen to him discussing his choices on National Public Radio here.
I learned today on the Virtual Linguist blog that the top three buzz words used in China this year were: 'awesome', 'fake divorce' and 'ant tribe'.
And in Belgium, it seems the word that topped the list for 2010 (at least in Flemish, the type of Dutch spoken in Belgium) was 'tentsletje', or 'tent slut', which The Daily Telegraph helpfully translates as "...a woman who has multiple sexual partners at a music festival..."
These WOTY lists are fun and comprise a sort of potted cultural and political history for a particular year.
Using words should be fun, yet too often (and I'm as guilty of this as anyone) we can get pulled out of shape when we perceive words being used 'incorrectly'.
As 2010 draws to a close, here's an inspiring reminder from - who else? - Stephen Fry about why we should try to enjoy and celebrate our language more and be less uptight about it usage. Words by the man himself, kinetic typography animation by Matt Rogers. Enjoy - and a Happy New Year!
Friday, 31 December 2010
Friday, 5 November 2010
One cap fits all?
In amongst the pain inflicted by the cuts contained in the UK Government's recent spending review, I was intrigued with all the talk about various 'caps'.
For example, on housing benefits:
For example, on housing benefits:
Housing benefit cap plan will backfire, ministers told (The Guardian)
David Cameron stands by 'fair' housing benefit cap (The Independent)
Saturday, 2 October 2010
Tweet, to who?
To tweet, or not to tweet - that is the question.
Love it or hate it, there is no ignoring Twitter. Launched in 2006, it passed the 100 million user mark earlier this year and is growing at an estimated rate of 300,000 new users a month.
I signed up for a Twitter account in March 2009 but after a couple of timid posts I left it alone and only began to play around with it from April of this year. And you really do need to play with it, to shape it to your personality and interests.You need to find people to follow and slowly, amazingly, you'll find that people will start to follow you. You also need to come to grips with Twitter's terminology, including timelines, hashtags, retweets and mentions.
I'll admit to being a bit overwhelmed at the start. It's rather like arriving at a party that's in full swing. The place is packed with lots of people talking loudly, laughing and it looks like it's a lot of fun. Your first few tweets feel like whispering into the void: no-one hears them. Gradually, though, your tweets get louder and a few people might turn their heads to hear what you've got to say. At this point you have to inch your way across the threshold and into the room in the hope that people will start to take notice and (gulp) speak to you.
After six months of being active on Twitter, I now follow 93 people and 27 people follow me. I've not quite crossed the threshold but I can clearly see the Twitterati all standing in the kitchen hogging the booze.
Why am I bothering? Social media is becoming an essential part of the marketing and communications mix for businesses. Companies are scrambling to find ways of harnessing the power of Twitter to promote brands, raise awareness, sell products and even recruit staff. Social media, it is said, allows people and companies to create a 'conversation' and 'communities' of shared interests. As an individual I'm also curious to see if Twitter was more than just finding out what celebrities are having for breakfast.
And it is so much more than that. Barack Obama used Twitter during the US Presidential election and famously tweeted his thanks when he knew he had won. When a passerby in New York tweeted that a plane had crash-landed on the Hudson last year, it was obvious that here was a powerful new way of communicating breaking news stories.
After the death of Boyzone singer Stephen Gately, Twitter outrage forced Jan Moir of The Daily Mail to apologise after describing his as 'sleazy'. And the gagging order that prevented The Guardian from reporting on the Trafigura case involving the dumping of toxic waste in Africa was lifted following an explosion of tweets that drove the story into the public domain.
Of course it's not all campaigning and crusading - there's a lot of time-wasting dross out there too. The trick is to be focused and picky about who you follow so most of the irrelevant or uninteresting stuff is filtered out. Twitter provides tools to help you organise your account. You don't have to follow everyone who decides to follow you. And you can quickly 'unfollow' or even 'block' people. You can also create lists, which enable you to group incoming tweets into separate categories.
With only a few 'real' friends to follow on Twitter, I began by searching for interesting people such as comedians (Bill Bailey, Simon Pegg, Marcus Brigstock, Tim Minchen) and writers (Armando Ianucci, Will Self, Charlie Brooker, Mark Gatiss). I also follow Number 10 and just one politician - John Prescott (who is a very active tweeter). The list is growing.
You can also search by topic. I'm interested in words and language and I've discovered a universe of linguists, copy-editors, and other grammar nerds to follow - such as @WriteAdvantage, @HangingNoodles, @wordlust, @Lynneguist, @MightyRedPen, amongst others. One great find I can recommend is @DrSamuelJohnson, who tweets in the language of the great lexicographer (a book of his collected tweets was published last month).
As well as being amused by things people tweet, I love the links that are often included (shrunk, of course, to fit in the 140 character limit). The only trouble I have right now is organising all the bookmarks I've made for all the fascinating blogs, websites and articles that Twitter has put me onto. I've also got to find the time to read them.
I'm still a newbie (a twatchling?) but I'm enjoying the experience. Only one of my tweets has been 'retweeted' so far (forwarded by someone else to their followers) but it's a start.
Come and join me - @suewalder.
Love it or hate it, there is no ignoring Twitter. Launched in 2006, it passed the 100 million user mark earlier this year and is growing at an estimated rate of 300,000 new users a month.
I signed up for a Twitter account in March 2009 but after a couple of timid posts I left it alone and only began to play around with it from April of this year. And you really do need to play with it, to shape it to your personality and interests.You need to find people to follow and slowly, amazingly, you'll find that people will start to follow you. You also need to come to grips with Twitter's terminology, including timelines, hashtags, retweets and mentions.
I'll admit to being a bit overwhelmed at the start. It's rather like arriving at a party that's in full swing. The place is packed with lots of people talking loudly, laughing and it looks like it's a lot of fun. Your first few tweets feel like whispering into the void: no-one hears them. Gradually, though, your tweets get louder and a few people might turn their heads to hear what you've got to say. At this point you have to inch your way across the threshold and into the room in the hope that people will start to take notice and (gulp) speak to you.
After six months of being active on Twitter, I now follow 93 people and 27 people follow me. I've not quite crossed the threshold but I can clearly see the Twitterati all standing in the kitchen hogging the booze.
Why am I bothering? Social media is becoming an essential part of the marketing and communications mix for businesses. Companies are scrambling to find ways of harnessing the power of Twitter to promote brands, raise awareness, sell products and even recruit staff. Social media, it is said, allows people and companies to create a 'conversation' and 'communities' of shared interests. As an individual I'm also curious to see if Twitter was more than just finding out what celebrities are having for breakfast.
And it is so much more than that. Barack Obama used Twitter during the US Presidential election and famously tweeted his thanks when he knew he had won. When a passerby in New York tweeted that a plane had crash-landed on the Hudson last year, it was obvious that here was a powerful new way of communicating breaking news stories.
After the death of Boyzone singer Stephen Gately, Twitter outrage forced Jan Moir of The Daily Mail to apologise after describing his as 'sleazy'. And the gagging order that prevented The Guardian from reporting on the Trafigura case involving the dumping of toxic waste in Africa was lifted following an explosion of tweets that drove the story into the public domain.
Of course it's not all campaigning and crusading - there's a lot of time-wasting dross out there too. The trick is to be focused and picky about who you follow so most of the irrelevant or uninteresting stuff is filtered out. Twitter provides tools to help you organise your account. You don't have to follow everyone who decides to follow you. And you can quickly 'unfollow' or even 'block' people. You can also create lists, which enable you to group incoming tweets into separate categories.
With only a few 'real' friends to follow on Twitter, I began by searching for interesting people such as comedians (Bill Bailey, Simon Pegg, Marcus Brigstock, Tim Minchen) and writers (Armando Ianucci, Will Self, Charlie Brooker, Mark Gatiss). I also follow Number 10 and just one politician - John Prescott (who is a very active tweeter). The list is growing.
You can also search by topic. I'm interested in words and language and I've discovered a universe of linguists, copy-editors, and other grammar nerds to follow - such as @WriteAdvantage, @HangingNoodles, @wordlust, @Lynneguist, @MightyRedPen, amongst others. One great find I can recommend is @DrSamuelJohnson, who tweets in the language of the great lexicographer (a book of his collected tweets was published last month).
As well as being amused by things people tweet, I love the links that are often included (shrunk, of course, to fit in the 140 character limit). The only trouble I have right now is organising all the bookmarks I've made for all the fascinating blogs, websites and articles that Twitter has put me onto. I've also got to find the time to read them.
I'm still a newbie (a twatchling?) but I'm enjoying the experience. Only one of my tweets has been 'retweeted' so far (forwarded by someone else to their followers) but it's a start.
Come and join me - @suewalder.
Thursday, 30 September 2010
Refudiate - searched for but not found
My summer break from blogging is over. Before I start though, and in case you missed the story, I want to follow-up my previous post with the news that 'refudiate' - the non-word coined by Sarah Palin - topped the list of words searched for at the Merriam-Webster online dictionary over the summer.
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
Sarah Palin - the portmanteau queen?
The former Governor of Alaska and wannabe Republican president Sarah Palin caused a stir recently when she seemed to coin a new word - refudiate - in an interview on Fox News. The story concerned plans to build a mosque in New York, close to where the twin towers of the World Trade Centre once stood.
Refudiate is what is known as a blend or portmanteau word. In this case, a blend of refute (to prove wrong) and repudiate (to deny or reject).
She used the word again in a tweet a few days later:
We all know that George W Bush tended to mangle the English language but it comes as a surprise to hear President Obama coin the phrase 'wee-wee'd up', as he did last year:
I sort of understand what Obama was implying with this odd phrase. He was referring to people getting worked up and agitated. I don't classify this as 'mangling' the language. This is genuinely inventive.
However, by comparing herself to Shakespeare, Palin merely gave the twitterverse a subject to really get its collective beak into. As the Huffington Post reported, the hashtag #ShakesPalin quickly became a trending topic. Even better - it led to some clever tweets such as these:
@normative - To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous liberals, or to quit halfterm, and by opposing, rake in speaking fees.
@djsmk - Neither a thinker nor a reader be / for thought oft loses both itself and friend /and reading dulls the edge of Fox TV.
But why are words like refudiate called portmanteaus? It refers to the old type of large travelling case or trunk which had two halves, hinged together. Lewis Carroll seems to have coined the phrase in Through the Looking Glass, And What Alice Found There, with Humpty explaining the meaning of Jabberwocky to Alice:
Modern examples include blog, camcorder, chillax, fanzine, chugger, advertorial, Brangelina and even wikipedia. I recently came across the word 'civilogue' on a website to describe the type of comments they would accept - a blend of civil and dialogue.
Palinspeak, as Palin's eccentric use of the language is often called, will no doubt throw us more to muse on in the coming years. Am I going to get wee-wee'd up about it? No. It's impossible to misunderestimate her and she's already refudiated her use of the word refudiate.
Refudiate is what is known as a blend or portmanteau word. In this case, a blend of refute (to prove wrong) and repudiate (to deny or reject).
She used the word again in a tweet a few days later:
Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn't it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate.The US media had a lot of fun with this and Palin only poured oil on the fire when her original tweet was removed and then followed-up with another:
"Refudiate," "misunderestimate," "wee-wee'd up." English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!This implies she not only puts herself in the same league as George W Bush (misunderestimate) and Barack Obama (wee-wee'd up) but also Shakespeare.
We all know that George W Bush tended to mangle the English language but it comes as a surprise to hear President Obama coin the phrase 'wee-wee'd up', as he did last year:
I sort of understand what Obama was implying with this odd phrase. He was referring to people getting worked up and agitated. I don't classify this as 'mangling' the language. This is genuinely inventive.
However, by comparing herself to Shakespeare, Palin merely gave the twitterverse a subject to really get its collective beak into. As the Huffington Post reported, the hashtag #ShakesPalin quickly became a trending topic. Even better - it led to some clever tweets such as these:
@normative - To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous liberals, or to quit halfterm, and by opposing, rake in speaking fees.
@djsmk - Neither a thinker nor a reader be / for thought oft loses both itself and friend /and reading dulls the edge of Fox TV.
But why are words like refudiate called portmanteaus? It refers to the old type of large travelling case or trunk which had two halves, hinged together. Lewis Carroll seems to have coined the phrase in Through the Looking Glass, And What Alice Found There, with Humpty explaining the meaning of Jabberwocky to Alice:
"Well, slithy means 'lithe and slimy'... You see it's like a portmanteau — there are two meanings packed up into one word."Portmanteau words are not a new phenomenon. If they're genuinely useful they'll gain currency and will eventually enter into mainstream dictionaries. We're all familiar with brunch (breakfast and lunch, coined in 1896), smog (smoke and fog, coined around 1900), and motel (motor and hotel, coined 1925).
Modern examples include blog, camcorder, chillax, fanzine, chugger, advertorial, Brangelina and even wikipedia. I recently came across the word 'civilogue' on a website to describe the type of comments they would accept - a blend of civil and dialogue.
Palinspeak, as Palin's eccentric use of the language is often called, will no doubt throw us more to muse on in the coming years. Am I going to get wee-wee'd up about it? No. It's impossible to misunderestimate her and she's already refudiated her use of the word refudiate.
Friday, 9 July 2010
Raoul Moat: what's in a name?
Raoul Thomas Moat. It's been almost impossible this week to avoid hearing or reading about the improbably named Geordie gunman currently on the run in Northumberland after shooting three people and killing one of them.
It's a serious situation. Yet we have the capacity to find the humour in it - a way of coping with tragedy that all humans share.
And the main thing we find amusing about it all? Mr Moat's name. It's an odd one and in an idle moment earlier this week I found myself attempting to make an anagram of it. The best I could come up with was: oath, trauma looms. Not knowing what to do with it, I posted it on my facebook page. Then, yesterday I included it in a twitter post.
Of course I did. Social media has been an element of the story itself as Mr Moat allegedly made threats via facebook before penning a 49-page handwritten letter to the police. The internet is the place to go for up-to-the-second gossip.
Right now, the internet is awash with comment on what's being said via the media and lots and lots of jokes. Search for 'Raoul Moat jokes' on google and you'll get more than 6,500,000 results. Lots of people want to talk about Raoul Moat; most of them just passing on what they've heard or read.
The story is a trending topic on twitter and among the top tweets (those tweets that have been re-tweeted by others more than 100 times) are:
This is all pretty harmless but the problem with all this stuff floating out there in cyberspace is that it's getting harder and harder to filter out all the rubbish from the good stuff and the lies from the truth. This is where you have to exercise the more rational side of your brain. And it's not just individuals who seem to have lost the power of critical thinking.
This week an American news website aolnews.com swallowed a spoof Raoul Moat story whole from the News Grind, a website that produces nothing but spoof news. A 'revised' story now states:
The original report has since been removed from the News Grind site but a blog on journalism.co.uk has a great piece on it.
By the way, as I write this, the latest Raoul Moat 'news' from News Grind, Stupid fat people in hiding after Moat warning', is a response to the warning by police that Mr Moat was now "targetting the wider public".
This story doesn't just have legs, it's got wheels - until they fall off.
It's a serious situation. Yet we have the capacity to find the humour in it - a way of coping with tragedy that all humans share.
And the main thing we find amusing about it all? Mr Moat's name. It's an odd one and in an idle moment earlier this week I found myself attempting to make an anagram of it. The best I could come up with was: oath, trauma looms. Not knowing what to do with it, I posted it on my facebook page. Then, yesterday I included it in a twitter post.
Of course I did. Social media has been an element of the story itself as Mr Moat allegedly made threats via facebook before penning a 49-page handwritten letter to the police. The internet is the place to go for up-to-the-second gossip.
Right now, the internet is awash with comment on what's being said via the media and lots and lots of jokes. Search for 'Raoul Moat jokes' on google and you'll get more than 6,500,000 results. Lots of people want to talk about Raoul Moat; most of them just passing on what they've heard or read.
The story is a trending topic on twitter and among the top tweets (those tweets that have been re-tweeted by others more than 100 times) are:
Manchester City have officially bid £45m for Raoul Moat. They've no idea who he is, but they've heard everyone's after him.
If Raoul Moat wore a stripy jumper and thick glasses he'd be a lot more fun to try and find.
NORTHUMBRIA Police, if u haven't found Raoul Moat By Sat, double the reward from 10k to 20k & call it a Raoul-over.There is also:
I don't find any of these jokes raoul moatly funny.I just checked on facebook and more than 17,000 people apparently 'like' the facebook group "Raoul Thomas Moat" Needs To Be Found Before He Kills Again!.
This is all pretty harmless but the problem with all this stuff floating out there in cyberspace is that it's getting harder and harder to filter out all the rubbish from the good stuff and the lies from the truth. This is where you have to exercise the more rational side of your brain. And it's not just individuals who seem to have lost the power of critical thinking.
This week an American news website aolnews.com swallowed a spoof Raoul Moat story whole from the News Grind, a website that produces nothing but spoof news. A 'revised' story now states:
...the situation is far different than what we reported in an earlier version of this post, which relied on false information from what turned out to be a satirical news site.
The original report has since been removed from the News Grind site but a blog on journalism.co.uk has a great piece on it.
By the way, as I write this, the latest Raoul Moat 'news' from News Grind, Stupid fat people in hiding after Moat warning', is a response to the warning by police that Mr Moat was now "targetting the wider public".
This story doesn't just have legs, it's got wheels - until they fall off.
Friday, 2 July 2010
English? Globish? Chinglish?
The reach of English is astounding.
English is the third largest language, by number of native speakers, after Mandarin Chinese and Spanish.
According to Wikipedia, around 400 million people speak English as a first language and between 199 million and 1,400 million more speak English as a second language. As linguist David Crystal points out in his book 'How language works' (2006), non-native English speakers outnumber native English speakers by about 3:1.
In 2005 between a quarter and a third of the world's population spoke English. In China around 350 million people are currently learning English in their own free time. It's estimated that by 2020, native English speakers may comprise only 15% of up to 2 billion people using or learning the language.
But the question is - what sort of English will they be speaking? English is used internationally for business, science, diplomacy and dominates the internet. Written English is likely to remain largely unaltered.
However, spoken English is already changing at a rapid rate. Apart from all the mother-tongue varieties (British English, American English, Australian English etc.) we already have pidgin versions such as Singlish (Singapore English), Engrish (in Japan) and Chinglish (in China) and many, many more - including Swenglish (used in Sweden - as anybody watching the Wallander series on BBC4 will have noticed).
The phenomenon of a global form of English used primarily by non-native speakers - Globish - cropped up on BBC Radio 4's Start the Week recently, with Robert McCrum discussing his new book 'Globish: How the English language became the world's language'.
Globish is a much-simplified sub-set of English based on about 1,500 words (the OED lists more than 600,000) with simple grammar and no idioms or jokes. It has been described as 'decaffeinated English' or 'English Lite' and is promoted by a former IBM executive, Jean-Paul Nerriere, who wrote a book called 'Parlez Globish'
He had noticed that in international business meetings, non-native speakers of English were using a simplified form of the language to communicate with each other - and actually preferred not to speak with native English speakers, who tend to overcomplicate things.
An article in The Australian newspaper put it like this:
Some people worry about the way that English is changing. The Queens' English Society (motto: good English matters) has even set up an Academy for English to protect it from 'declining standards'. However, it is doomed to fail. English has always changed and evolved, soaking up words and phrases from other languages and is the richer for it.
Given the numbers of Chinese people learning English, my guess is that we'll benefit from new expressions coming from 'Chinglish'. From Chinese English Pidgin we already have 'long time no see', 'look-see', 'lose face', 'no go', and 'no can do'.
As Oliver Ludz Radtke says in his little book 'Chinglish: found in translation': "...the English-speaking traveller more frequently encounters Chinglish in the form of public signs rather than spoken oddities." He aims to show the creative side of Chinglish - a product of Chinese grammar and the English dictionary.
And creative it certainly is. Where we would have a sign simply saying 'Keep off the grass', in China you might see:
Makes you stop and think, then smile.
English is the third largest language, by number of native speakers, after Mandarin Chinese and Spanish.
According to Wikipedia, around 400 million people speak English as a first language and between 199 million and 1,400 million more speak English as a second language. As linguist David Crystal points out in his book 'How language works' (2006), non-native English speakers outnumber native English speakers by about 3:1.
In 2005 between a quarter and a third of the world's population spoke English. In China around 350 million people are currently learning English in their own free time. It's estimated that by 2020, native English speakers may comprise only 15% of up to 2 billion people using or learning the language.
But the question is - what sort of English will they be speaking? English is used internationally for business, science, diplomacy and dominates the internet. Written English is likely to remain largely unaltered.
However, spoken English is already changing at a rapid rate. Apart from all the mother-tongue varieties (British English, American English, Australian English etc.) we already have pidgin versions such as Singlish (Singapore English), Engrish (in Japan) and Chinglish (in China) and many, many more - including Swenglish (used in Sweden - as anybody watching the Wallander series on BBC4 will have noticed).
The phenomenon of a global form of English used primarily by non-native speakers - Globish - cropped up on BBC Radio 4's Start the Week recently, with Robert McCrum discussing his new book 'Globish: How the English language became the world's language'.
Globish is a much-simplified sub-set of English based on about 1,500 words (the OED lists more than 600,000) with simple grammar and no idioms or jokes. It has been described as 'decaffeinated English' or 'English Lite' and is promoted by a former IBM executive, Jean-Paul Nerriere, who wrote a book called 'Parlez Globish'
He had noticed that in international business meetings, non-native speakers of English were using a simplified form of the language to communicate with each other - and actually preferred not to speak with native English speakers, who tend to overcomplicate things.
An article in The Australian newspaper put it like this:
Their florid phraseology and grammatical complexities are often incomprehensible, said Nerriere, who added: "One thing you never do in Globish is tell a joke."So - no need to worry about Globish taking over anytime soon. But it might force us to
Some people worry about the way that English is changing. The Queens' English Society (motto: good English matters) has even set up an Academy for English to protect it from 'declining standards'. However, it is doomed to fail. English has always changed and evolved, soaking up words and phrases from other languages and is the richer for it.
Given the numbers of Chinese people learning English, my guess is that we'll benefit from new expressions coming from 'Chinglish'. From Chinese English Pidgin we already have 'long time no see', 'look-see', 'lose face', 'no go', and 'no can do'.
As Oliver Ludz Radtke says in his little book 'Chinglish: found in translation': "...the English-speaking traveller more frequently encounters Chinglish in the form of public signs rather than spoken oddities." He aims to show the creative side of Chinglish - a product of Chinese grammar and the English dictionary.
And creative it certainly is. Where we would have a sign simply saying 'Keep off the grass', in China you might see:
Makes you stop and think, then smile.
Friday, 18 June 2010
Why not swear our way out of recession?
Swearing. It's an emotive subject. Every so often it flares up as an issue of media interest but the debate is never settled and we carrying on effing and blinding.
Recent research by communications watchdog Ofcom seems to have detected a 'softening' of public attitudes to swearing in broadcast media. An article in The Guardian said the Ofcom report gives detailed guidance on public tolerance of bad language:
The Daily Mail, bless it, carried out some research of its own and - surprise, surprise - came to the opposite conclusion. Their survey found that:
Love it or hate it, the fact is that we'll never stop swearing. There will always be words that are socially unacceptable or even taboo - but they'll get said. Sometimes they are the only words that will adequately express your rage, pain, surprise, frustration or even delight. As a swearer I have to admit I enjoy letting rip - usually in the car - saying substitute words like 'sugar' or 'frigging' doesn't do it for me.
Here's the ubiquitous Stephen Fry on the irrational response of most people to swear words:
Gordon Ramsay is surely the King of the F-word. People actually count how many times he uses it during his TV shows.
Which brings me to an interesting idea - the swearer's bank - first proposed more than 250 years ago in a satirical pamphlet by Jonathan Swift. His idea was, through an act of parliament, to levy a shilling from everyone caught indulging in 'profane swearing'. In this way, the country could raise a 'vast revenue'.
The British are known to be prolific swearers (Daily Mail readers excluded) and are perhaps swearing more than ever. We also happen to have a massive budget deficit. So...why not have a national swear box? There's 61 million of us. By paying in a quid every time we swear, we could balance the budget in no time. Gordon Ramsay could single-handedly lead us out of recession.
Recent research by communications watchdog Ofcom seems to have detected a 'softening' of public attitudes to swearing in broadcast media. An article in The Guardian said the Ofcom report gives detailed guidance on public tolerance of bad language:
"loony", "nutter", "poof" and "queer" can be used at any time of day while the F-word remains unacceptable before the watershed...The article went on to say:
Viewers are relaxed about words such as "bitch", "wanker" and "shit" after the 9pm watershed, the research suggested, and are even willing to hear them earlier in some circumstances. Other words, including "pussy", "fuck", "motherfucker" and "cunt" are still considered to be unacceptable and should be barred pre-watershed, but very few objected to the them being used after 9pm.I love that "are even willing..." Mary Whitehouse must be spinning in her grave.
The Daily Mail, bless it, carried out some research of its own and - surprise, surprise - came to the opposite conclusion. Their survey found that:
Swearing on television offends millions of viewers...A majority also believe bad language on television has worsened over the past decade and that it is directly responsible for an increase in swearing by youngsters, despite findings by Ofcom.
The TV watchdog's study...was based on just 130 viewers with a disproportionate focus on minority groups, including travellers and transsexuals.I love that "including travellers and transsexuals." I guess Mary can stop spinning now.
Love it or hate it, the fact is that we'll never stop swearing. There will always be words that are socially unacceptable or even taboo - but they'll get said. Sometimes they are the only words that will adequately express your rage, pain, surprise, frustration or even delight. As a swearer I have to admit I enjoy letting rip - usually in the car - saying substitute words like 'sugar' or 'frigging' doesn't do it for me.
Here's the ubiquitous Stephen Fry on the irrational response of most people to swear words:
Gordon Ramsay is surely the King of the F-word. People actually count how many times he uses it during his TV shows.
Which brings me to an interesting idea - the swearer's bank - first proposed more than 250 years ago in a satirical pamphlet by Jonathan Swift. His idea was, through an act of parliament, to levy a shilling from everyone caught indulging in 'profane swearing'. In this way, the country could raise a 'vast revenue'.
The British are known to be prolific swearers (Daily Mail readers excluded) and are perhaps swearing more than ever. We also happen to have a massive budget deficit. So...why not have a national swear box? There's 61 million of us. By paying in a quid every time we swear, we could balance the budget in no time. Gordon Ramsay could single-handedly lead us out of recession.
Thursday, 13 May 2010
Siphon the python
How weird that the day after my last post I should stumble upon a news story in The Guardian Science blog about an Australian scientist who has successfully challenged the Oxford English Dictionary over its definition of the word 'siphon'.
It seems while preparing an article on siphoning Dr Stephen Hughes, a physics lecturer at Queensland University of Technology, realised that the dictionary definition was wrong as it stated that atmospheric pressure rather than gravity forces liquid through a siphon tube. When Dr Hughes pointed this out to the OED, they admitted that he was the first person to point out the error (the entry dates from 1911) and will now be revising the text using some of his 'helpful comments' in the next edition.
What's so lovely about this is that the word siphon appears in a well-known piece of Australian slang. To 'siphon the python' means to urinate.
It seems while preparing an article on siphoning Dr Stephen Hughes, a physics lecturer at Queensland University of Technology, realised that the dictionary definition was wrong as it stated that atmospheric pressure rather than gravity forces liquid through a siphon tube. When Dr Hughes pointed this out to the OED, they admitted that he was the first person to point out the error (the entry dates from 1911) and will now be revising the text using some of his 'helpful comments' in the next edition.
What's so lovely about this is that the word siphon appears in a well-known piece of Australian slang. To 'siphon the python' means to urinate.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
Budgie smugglers and free traders
Andrew Marr's Start the Week on Radio 4 yesterday was a wonderful distraction from the seemingly interminable talk of hung parliaments, coalition governments, proportional representation, progressive alliances, and political dealings of all shades.
Why? Because one of my favourite Australian phrases, Budgie Smugglers, popped up in a discussion with the legendary Australian poet Les Murray, who is in London to give the Poetry Society Annual Lecture - Infinite Anthology: Adventures in Lexiconia.
As the Urban Dictionary puts it, Budgie Smugglers describes: "Any item of male bathing costume or underwear that encloses the wearer's genitalia in a manner that resembles the concealment of a budgerigar."
Australia's unique origins as a penal colony, its use of English dialect words (e.g. 'dinkum', a Midlands dialect word for 'work'; 'fair dinkum' means a fair day's work) together with the playfulness of Cockney and Irish English plus borrowings from Aboriginal culture (budgerigar, billabong) has created a distinct variety of English. For more on Australian English see the Wikipedia entry here.
Australians are direct, dislike authority and loathe anyone who looks like he might be 'up himself'. And their language reflects this - it's earthy, often pretty filthy but also funny.
I lived in Melbourne in the 1990s and was intrigued to discover words such as 'dag', 'nong' and 'drongo' (for idiot), to dob in (to betray), and dole bludger (someone too lazy to work). other words I came to enjoy included furphy (a rumour or false story), snag (sausage), sanger (sandwich), grog (alcohol) and bottle shop (off licence). I was also impressed with the different ways the word 'mate' could be used - from a warning to a friendly greeting. While I lived there, the Prime Minister at the time, Paul Keating, memorably referred to Australia as being located "at the arse end of the world".
But back to Les Murray. As well as being Australia's best-known poet, he works as a consultant to the Macquarie Dictionary, a job described on Start the Week as a "word catcher". Just as Webster's Dictionary in the US captures American English, the Macquarie Dictionary captures Australian usage.
According to The Age (Melbourne's daily broadsheet):
Les's favourite Australian word apparently is 'eight-hour day'. This stems from direct action by workers in Melbourne during the 1850s who demanded (and got) eight hours a day each for work, rest and play.
Other words he mentioned included: Pobbledonk ("a red-sided banjo frog with a resonant voice"), window licker (a voyeur), ranga (a redhead), papped (to be snapped by the papparazzi) and free traders ("split bloomers worn under voluminous skirts") - which brings us inevitably but rather neatly back to underwear, although of a more ancient nature.
Why? Because one of my favourite Australian phrases, Budgie Smugglers, popped up in a discussion with the legendary Australian poet Les Murray, who is in London to give the Poetry Society Annual Lecture - Infinite Anthology: Adventures in Lexiconia.
As the Urban Dictionary puts it, Budgie Smugglers describes: "Any item of male bathing costume or underwear that encloses the wearer's genitalia in a manner that resembles the concealment of a budgerigar."
Australia's unique origins as a penal colony, its use of English dialect words (e.g. 'dinkum', a Midlands dialect word for 'work'; 'fair dinkum' means a fair day's work) together with the playfulness of Cockney and Irish English plus borrowings from Aboriginal culture (budgerigar, billabong) has created a distinct variety of English. For more on Australian English see the Wikipedia entry here.
Australians are direct, dislike authority and loathe anyone who looks like he might be 'up himself'. And their language reflects this - it's earthy, often pretty filthy but also funny.
I lived in Melbourne in the 1990s and was intrigued to discover words such as 'dag', 'nong' and 'drongo' (for idiot), to dob in (to betray), and dole bludger (someone too lazy to work). other words I came to enjoy included furphy (a rumour or false story), snag (sausage), sanger (sandwich), grog (alcohol) and bottle shop (off licence). I was also impressed with the different ways the word 'mate' could be used - from a warning to a friendly greeting. While I lived there, the Prime Minister at the time, Paul Keating, memorably referred to Australia as being located "at the arse end of the world".
But back to Les Murray. As well as being Australia's best-known poet, he works as a consultant to the Macquarie Dictionary, a job described on Start the Week as a "word catcher". Just as Webster's Dictionary in the US captures American English, the Macquarie Dictionary captures Australian usage.
According to The Age (Melbourne's daily broadsheet):
The gig with the Macquarie – "an honest day's work, pulling words out of word lists" – is the perfect job for a man who suffers from what he calls "verberation", the state of having words running through your head all the time. And it gave him Infinite Anthology, a poem about definitions for the new book: "creators of single words or phrases are by far the largest class/of poets. Many ignore all other poetry."
Les's favourite Australian word apparently is 'eight-hour day'. This stems from direct action by workers in Melbourne during the 1850s who demanded (and got) eight hours a day each for work, rest and play.
Other words he mentioned included: Pobbledonk ("a red-sided banjo frog with a resonant voice"), window licker (a voyeur), ranga (a redhead), papped (to be snapped by the papparazzi) and free traders ("split bloomers worn under voluminous skirts") - which brings us inevitably but rather neatly back to underwear, although of a more ancient nature.
Friday, 30 April 2010
Say what you mean and mean what you say
Gordon Brown's spectacular own goal this week - instantly dubbed "Brown's 'bigot' gaffe" by the media - may well be the defining moment not just of his election campaign but of his political career. As Roy Greenslade put it in his Guardian Blog yesterday: "It was the gaffe of all gaffes. And he will pay dearly for it."
Ah, the perils of getting out and about and talking to real people. A slightly awkward encounter with 65 year-old widow Gillian Duffy, who talked about eastern Europeans 'flocking' into Britain, was turned into a full-blown disaster when Gordon Brown got into his waiting car and made what was called "unguarded comments" to an aide, little realising that the lapel microphone provided by Sky News was still turned on.
He described Mrs Duffy as "a sort of bigoted woman". Later that day he was caught holding his head in his hands as Jeremy Vine played the comments back to the nation. Yesterday The Daily Mail helpfully produced a page of pictures which showed how the whole gruesome episode unfolded in the space of one hour.
So, what is a gaffe? The Free Dictionary defines it as: 1. A clumsy social error; a faux pas; and 2. A blatant mistake or misjudgment.
I learned this week from a Comment if Free piece in the Guardian by Jacob Weisberg, that Gordon Brown had made what is technically a Kinsley gaffe - defined by Wikipedia as: "an occurrence of (a politician) telling the truth by accident." The term was first coined by American political journalist Michael Kinsley in 1992.
It could also be defined as a microphone gaffe. Wikipedia defines this as "an error whereby a microphone is switched on in proximity of a subject who is unaware that their remarks are being broadcast." And this type of gaffe catches out not just politicians, but sports presenters, journalists and newsreaders. But this equation is probably true: human + microphone = disaster waiting to happen.
Gordon Brown's remarks are included in Wikipedia's list of political gaffes, just below Jesse Jackson's 2008 whispered aside before a Fox News interview that he wanted to "cut his (Barack Obama's) nuts off" after Obama had made an election speech questioning working class values. Third on the list is Prime Minister John Major's comments after an ITN interview in 1993 in which he called members of his Cabinet "bastards". Top of the list is the infamous 'soundcheck' comments made by President Ronald Reagan in 1984 during the Cold War. Although never broadcast, he said: "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
Curiously, Hillary Clinton's use of the phrase 'to misspeak' seems to be missing from the list. She was famously caught out during the 2008 race for the democratic presidential nomination exaggerating the dangers she had faced in 1996 during a short trip to Bosnia. When challenged, she said "I misspoke". There's a wonderful essay in the New Yorker about the issue of 'misspeaking' here.
But back to the hapless Gordon Brown, if I was putting together a 'package' of visuals to describe his week, I'd be tempted to use 'I am not a robot' by Marina and the Diamonds as the backing track. Why? Listen to the lyrics:
I guess the moral of the tale for politicians is: always try to say what you mean and mean what you say.
Hah!
Ah, the perils of getting out and about and talking to real people. A slightly awkward encounter with 65 year-old widow Gillian Duffy, who talked about eastern Europeans 'flocking' into Britain, was turned into a full-blown disaster when Gordon Brown got into his waiting car and made what was called "unguarded comments" to an aide, little realising that the lapel microphone provided by Sky News was still turned on.
He described Mrs Duffy as "a sort of bigoted woman". Later that day he was caught holding his head in his hands as Jeremy Vine played the comments back to the nation. Yesterday The Daily Mail helpfully produced a page of pictures which showed how the whole gruesome episode unfolded in the space of one hour.
So, what is a gaffe? The Free Dictionary defines it as: 1. A clumsy social error; a faux pas; and 2. A blatant mistake or misjudgment.
I learned this week from a Comment if Free piece in the Guardian by Jacob Weisberg, that Gordon Brown had made what is technically a Kinsley gaffe - defined by Wikipedia as: "an occurrence of (a politician) telling the truth by accident." The term was first coined by American political journalist Michael Kinsley in 1992.
It could also be defined as a microphone gaffe. Wikipedia defines this as "an error whereby a microphone is switched on in proximity of a subject who is unaware that their remarks are being broadcast." And this type of gaffe catches out not just politicians, but sports presenters, journalists and newsreaders. But this equation is probably true: human + microphone = disaster waiting to happen.
Gordon Brown's remarks are included in Wikipedia's list of political gaffes, just below Jesse Jackson's 2008 whispered aside before a Fox News interview that he wanted to "cut his (Barack Obama's) nuts off" after Obama had made an election speech questioning working class values. Third on the list is Prime Minister John Major's comments after an ITN interview in 1993 in which he called members of his Cabinet "bastards". Top of the list is the infamous 'soundcheck' comments made by President Ronald Reagan in 1984 during the Cold War. Although never broadcast, he said: "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
Curiously, Hillary Clinton's use of the phrase 'to misspeak' seems to be missing from the list. She was famously caught out during the 2008 race for the democratic presidential nomination exaggerating the dangers she had faced in 1996 during a short trip to Bosnia. When challenged, she said "I misspoke". There's a wonderful essay in the New Yorker about the issue of 'misspeaking' here.
But back to the hapless Gordon Brown, if I was putting together a 'package' of visuals to describe his week, I'd be tempted to use 'I am not a robot' by Marina and the Diamonds as the backing track. Why? Listen to the lyrics:
I guess the moral of the tale for politicians is: always try to say what you mean and mean what you say.
Hah!
Monday, 26 April 2010
Ouch! Typos that hurt
A little news item that caught my eye recently concerned an Australian publishing company that had to reprint 7,000 cookbooks, at a cost of £12,000, due to a typo.
The typo occured in a pasta recipe (for tagliatelle with sardines and prosciutto) that called for "salt and freshly ground black people" instead of black pepper.
According to the report on the BBC website, "almost every one of the more than 150 recipes in the book listed salt and freshly ground black pepper, but a misprint occurred on just one page."
Well, that's all it takes - one mistake.
Bob Sessions, head of publishing at Penguin Group Australia was quoted as saying: "When it comes to the proof-reader, of course they should have picked it up, but proof-reading a cookbook is an extremely difficult task. I find that quite forgivable."
How great is that?
But all this is just an excuse for me to show you a wonderful youtube clip by US performance poet Taylor Mali:
Remember - "the red penis your friend."
The typo occured in a pasta recipe (for tagliatelle with sardines and prosciutto) that called for "salt and freshly ground black people" instead of black pepper.
According to the report on the BBC website, "almost every one of the more than 150 recipes in the book listed salt and freshly ground black pepper, but a misprint occurred on just one page."
Well, that's all it takes - one mistake.
Bob Sessions, head of publishing at Penguin Group Australia was quoted as saying: "When it comes to the proof-reader, of course they should have picked it up, but proof-reading a cookbook is an extremely difficult task. I find that quite forgivable."
How great is that?
But all this is just an excuse for me to show you a wonderful youtube clip by US performance poet Taylor Mali:
Remember - "the red penis your friend."
Thursday, 22 April 2010
Iceland's volcano - a tale of plumes & pronunciation
The eruption of Iceland's Eyjafjallajökull volcano has understandably caught the attention of the media - especially as it involves thousands of Britons 'stranded' on foreign shores, facing epic return journeys.
But it has been noticeable that while print and online media have used the full name of the volcano in their reports (and that lovely description of the ash cloud - 'plume'), broadcast media journalists have tended to go with 'Iceland's volcano' to avoid trying to pronounce a word that means 'island-mountain glacier' in Icelandic.
Wikipedia helpfully provides a sound link . But for those of us with no experience or knowledge of Icelandic, it's pretty hard to get this right.
By 22 April, typing in 'how to pronounce the Iceland volcano' in Google yielded an amazing 14,600,000 results - proving that people have now got bored by the stories of stranded travellers and are looking for new angles to the story.
Typing in 'Eyjafjallajökull pronunciation' into the search box on youtube got 55 results, including this one:
And this one - comprising a song written and performed by Icelandic singer Eliza Geirsdottir Newman:
Of course, big news stories tend to generate jokes and the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano is no exception.
Providingnews.com, a news website in the US, already has a list of 'erupting jokes'. In at number 7 is:
"An eruption in Katla (the volcano next to Eyjafjallajökull) will be a lot harder on everyone, except on those who have to pronounce it."
So there you have it.
But it has been noticeable that while print and online media have used the full name of the volcano in their reports (and that lovely description of the ash cloud - 'plume'), broadcast media journalists have tended to go with 'Iceland's volcano' to avoid trying to pronounce a word that means 'island-mountain glacier' in Icelandic.
Wikipedia helpfully provides a sound link . But for those of us with no experience or knowledge of Icelandic, it's pretty hard to get this right.
By 22 April, typing in 'how to pronounce the Iceland volcano' in Google yielded an amazing 14,600,000 results - proving that people have now got bored by the stories of stranded travellers and are looking for new angles to the story.
Typing in 'Eyjafjallajökull pronunciation' into the search box on youtube got 55 results, including this one:
And this one - comprising a song written and performed by Icelandic singer Eliza Geirsdottir Newman:
Of course, big news stories tend to generate jokes and the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano is no exception.
Providingnews.com, a news website in the US, already has a list of 'erupting jokes'. In at number 7 is:
"An eruption in Katla (the volcano next to Eyjafjallajökull) will be a lot harder on everyone, except on those who have to pronounce it."
So there you have it.
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
Election language
After Nick Clegg's surprise victory in the UK's first televised leaders election debate, it's been interesting reading some analysis of the language used not only in the live debate but also by all three main parties in their election manifestos which were published last week.
Of course all three party leaders had been rehearsed to within an inch of their lives for the debate but the words they use as individuals can still tell us something more than the soundbites they have committed to memory.
In his blog Wordwatchers American psychologist and linguist James W Pennebaker has analysed the words used by Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg during the debate on 15 April to "get a sense of their personality, social, and thinking styles." Pennebaker and his team at The University of Texas have run similar tests on words used by candidates in the American presidential debates in 2004 and 2008.
Interestingly, their approach to this word-crunching task is to focus on what they call 'junk' words that we all use in everyday speech - pronouns, prepositions, articles, conjunctions, and auxiliary verbs. Whereas content words (nouns and verbs) tell us what someone is talking about, says Pennebaker, junk words can provide an insight into people's personality, emotional state, and social styles.
While he describes the first debate as "incredibly tame", with all three men taking in a similar way, Pennebaker found "striking differences" between Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg with David Cameron somewhere in between.
Gordon Brown used "emotionally and psychologically distant" language and instead of using 'I' tended to use 'we' as well as using more negative emotion words. Apparently using 'we' is a sign of distancing seen in "less adept" politicians, such as John Kerry and Al Gore.
Nick Clegg, by contrast, used 'I' more often, used far more positive words and used the present tense, indicating he was more honest and engaged in "the here-and-now".
Like Brown, David Cameron also used a lot of negative emotion words but was more angry, whereas Brown came across as anxious. His use of words like would, should, and could made him appear moralistic and had "a greater focus on money-related issues."
The analysis also shed light on the thinking styles of each leader, with Gordon Brown’s language seeming the most complex and interesting. In contrast, both David Cameron and Nick Clegg used more "cognitive or thinking words – words such as think, realize, understand, because." Pennebaker says these words are used by people "still trying to construct a story. In other words, Cameron and Clegg are still trying to come up with ways to frame their thinking compared to Brown who already has a story in his head."
Pennebaker warns us not to take the results of this analysis too seriously but suggests that as they get used to the settings of the debates, each candidate will start to reveal their natural ways of speaking." Now that will be interesting.
Meanwhile, on last Saturday's 'Heckler' programme on Radio 4, Clive Anderson challenged a forensic linguist, Dr Tim Grant, to assess each of the main parties' manifestos.
His computer analysis revealed the Tories' manifesto contained more negative emotional words and Labour's more positive words. Unlike both the Tories and Labour, the Liberal Democrats apparently don't use the word 'will'. Instead they use lots of 'cognitive' words - they 'believe' in things.
Unsurprisingly, Dr Grant concluded that the manifestos were not written for the general public. Instead, they're written for other politicians and journalists, with lots of jargon and 'embedded language' that only those in the know can interpret.
Sounds like a great insomnia cure to me.
Of course all three party leaders had been rehearsed to within an inch of their lives for the debate but the words they use as individuals can still tell us something more than the soundbites they have committed to memory.
In his blog Wordwatchers American psychologist and linguist James W Pennebaker has analysed the words used by Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg during the debate on 15 April to "get a sense of their personality, social, and thinking styles." Pennebaker and his team at The University of Texas have run similar tests on words used by candidates in the American presidential debates in 2004 and 2008.
Interestingly, their approach to this word-crunching task is to focus on what they call 'junk' words that we all use in everyday speech - pronouns, prepositions, articles, conjunctions, and auxiliary verbs. Whereas content words (nouns and verbs) tell us what someone is talking about, says Pennebaker, junk words can provide an insight into people's personality, emotional state, and social styles.
While he describes the first debate as "incredibly tame", with all three men taking in a similar way, Pennebaker found "striking differences" between Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg with David Cameron somewhere in between.
Gordon Brown used "emotionally and psychologically distant" language and instead of using 'I' tended to use 'we' as well as using more negative emotion words. Apparently using 'we' is a sign of distancing seen in "less adept" politicians, such as John Kerry and Al Gore.
Nick Clegg, by contrast, used 'I' more often, used far more positive words and used the present tense, indicating he was more honest and engaged in "the here-and-now".
Like Brown, David Cameron also used a lot of negative emotion words but was more angry, whereas Brown came across as anxious. His use of words like would, should, and could made him appear moralistic and had "a greater focus on money-related issues."
The analysis also shed light on the thinking styles of each leader, with Gordon Brown’s language seeming the most complex and interesting. In contrast, both David Cameron and Nick Clegg used more "cognitive or thinking words – words such as think, realize, understand, because." Pennebaker says these words are used by people "still trying to construct a story. In other words, Cameron and Clegg are still trying to come up with ways to frame their thinking compared to Brown who already has a story in his head."
Pennebaker warns us not to take the results of this analysis too seriously but suggests that as they get used to the settings of the debates, each candidate will start to reveal their natural ways of speaking." Now that will be interesting.
Meanwhile, on last Saturday's 'Heckler' programme on Radio 4, Clive Anderson challenged a forensic linguist, Dr Tim Grant, to assess each of the main parties' manifestos.
His computer analysis revealed the Tories' manifesto contained more negative emotional words and Labour's more positive words. Unlike both the Tories and Labour, the Liberal Democrats apparently don't use the word 'will'. Instead they use lots of 'cognitive' words - they 'believe' in things.
Unsurprisingly, Dr Grant concluded that the manifestos were not written for the general public. Instead, they're written for other politicians and journalists, with lots of jargon and 'embedded language' that only those in the know can interpret.
Sounds like a great insomnia cure to me.
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Headline poetry
The announcement yesterday of Samantha Cameron's pregnancy was a gift not only to Conservative Party spin doctors in the run up to the general election, but also to newspaper sub-editors.
Here's today's headline from The Sun: 'Wham bam! Sam Cam to be mam - and she'll need a new pram'.
While the Daily Mail went with: 'Sam's having a babycam'.
A more political - and less alliterative - approach was taken by both The Guardian: 'Sam Cam's labour bombshell', and The Times, with: 'Sam Cam moves towards labour'.
Puns are often regarded as a pretty low form of word play and usually elicit groans rather than bellows of laughter. For a pretty thorough analysis of puns and various other types of wordplay click here.
However, constrained by space and the need to catch a reader's attention, tabloid newspapers have raised punning to an art form. I never buy or read The Sun but I have to admire the skill and audacity the paper's subs display. The Sun is the Daddy when it comes to the fantastic headline.
Here's a few examples:
Sarky gets Narky at Carla Malarky (15 March 2010)
Obama Llama Ding Dong (19 February 2010)
Scumbag Millionaires (11 February 2009)
Hawk Kestrel Manoeuvres in the Park (9 February 2009)
How do you Solve a Problem like Korea? (10 Oct 2006)
Super Caley go Ballistic, Celtic are Atrocious (Feb 2000)
Freddie Starr ate my Hamster (13 March 1986) (I know it's not a pun, or strictly playing with words - but it's a monster headline)
Stick it up your Junta (20 April 1982).
Here's today's headline from The Sun: 'Wham bam! Sam Cam to be mam - and she'll need a new pram'.
While the Daily Mail went with: 'Sam's having a babycam'.
A more political - and less alliterative - approach was taken by both The Guardian: 'Sam Cam's labour bombshell', and The Times, with: 'Sam Cam moves towards labour'.
Puns are often regarded as a pretty low form of word play and usually elicit groans rather than bellows of laughter. For a pretty thorough analysis of puns and various other types of wordplay click here.
However, constrained by space and the need to catch a reader's attention, tabloid newspapers have raised punning to an art form. I never buy or read The Sun but I have to admire the skill and audacity the paper's subs display. The Sun is the Daddy when it comes to the fantastic headline.
Here's a few examples:
Sarky gets Narky at Carla Malarky (15 March 2010)
Obama Llama Ding Dong (19 February 2010)
Scumbag Millionaires (11 February 2009)
Hawk Kestrel Manoeuvres in the Park (9 February 2009)
How do you Solve a Problem like Korea? (10 Oct 2006)
Super Caley go Ballistic, Celtic are Atrocious (Feb 2000)
Freddie Starr ate my Hamster (13 March 1986) (I know it's not a pun, or strictly playing with words - but it's a monster headline)
Stick it up your Junta (20 April 1982).
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Can you ban words?
As a lover of words I'm ideologically opposed to banishing words - it's like burning books.
However, being a logophile doesn't stop me from loathing all types of jargon, and there are many words and phrases that make me cringe.
So, it's with mixed emotions that I greet this year's list of non-words announced by the Local Government Association (LGA) For the past three years, the LGA has issued an annual list of words that public sector workers should avoid using when dealing with the public.
New words on this year's list (taken from EU, central and regional government, quangos, business management speak and public relations) include:
Other wince-inducing words on the list are:
Once they're out there in the public domain, jargon words seem to be able to worm their way into our vocabularies. But I'm not sure if should I be ashamed of using the following words that are included in this year's list:
However, being a logophile doesn't stop me from loathing all types of jargon, and there are many words and phrases that make me cringe.
So, it's with mixed emotions that I greet this year's list of non-words announced by the Local Government Association (LGA) For the past three years, the LGA has issued an annual list of words that public sector workers should avoid using when dealing with the public.
New words on this year's list (taken from EU, central and regional government, quangos, business management speak and public relations) include:
- trialogue
- wellderly
- goldfish bowl facilitated conversation
- tonality
- webinar
- under-capacitated
- clienting
- disbenefits.
Other wince-inducing words on the list are:
- citizen touchpoints
- world cafe
- hereditament
- meaningful reusable interactivity
- predictors of beaconicity
- thought shower
- reablement
- worklessness.
Once they're out there in the public domain, jargon words seem to be able to worm their way into our vocabularies. But I'm not sure if should I be ashamed of using the following words that are included in this year's list:
- best practice
- client
- customer
- facilitate
- procurement
- robust
- strategy.
Tuesday, 2 March 2010
Diagram Prize - a celebration of odd book titles
Although the Diagram Prize has apparently been running for more than 30 years, I have only recently come across it. It's an annual prize awarded by The Bookseller magazine to the book with the oddest title, as voted by the public.
Although many of the entries seem to come from the world of academia, there are also plenty of self-help titles and even children's books.
The shortlist for books published in 2009 prize was announced last month and includes six glorious titles:
The first ever prize was awarded in 1978 to Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Nude Mice.
Last year, to celebrate 30 years of oddity, a special 'Diagram of Diagrams' prize was run to find the most odd title of all the winners. Some 8,500 people voted and the overall winner was 2007's fantastically titled If You Want Closure In Your Relationship, Start With Your Legs.
Some of my favourite winning titles of previous years are:
1986's Oral Sadism and the Vegetarian Personality
1989's How to Shit in the Woods: An Environmentally Sound Approach to a Lost Art
1996's Greek Rural Postmen and Their Cancellation Numbers
2003' The Big Book of Lesbian Horse Stories
2006's The Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America: A Guide to Field Identification
If you go to the Bookseller's website you can vote for the title you think deserves the 2009 prize - the winner will be announced on 26 March. My money is Collectable Spoons of the Third Reich - a title Spike Milligan would have been proud of.
Although many of the entries seem to come from the world of academia, there are also plenty of self-help titles and even children's books.
The shortlist for books published in 2009 prize was announced last month and includes six glorious titles:
- The Changing World of Inflammatory Bowel Disease
- Collectable Spoons of the Third Reich
- Crocheting Adventures with Hyperbolic Planes
- Governing Lethal Behaviour in Autonomous Robots
- What Kind of Bean is this Chihuahua?
- Afterthoughts of a Worm Hunter.
The first ever prize was awarded in 1978 to Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Nude Mice.
Last year, to celebrate 30 years of oddity, a special 'Diagram of Diagrams' prize was run to find the most odd title of all the winners. Some 8,500 people voted and the overall winner was 2007's fantastically titled If You Want Closure In Your Relationship, Start With Your Legs.
Some of my favourite winning titles of previous years are:
1986's Oral Sadism and the Vegetarian Personality
1989's How to Shit in the Woods: An Environmentally Sound Approach to a Lost Art
1996's Greek Rural Postmen and Their Cancellation Numbers
2003' The Big Book of Lesbian Horse Stories
2006's The Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America: A Guide to Field Identification
If you go to the Bookseller's website you can vote for the title you think deserves the 2009 prize - the winner will be announced on 26 March. My money is Collectable Spoons of the Third Reich - a title Spike Milligan would have been proud of.
Friday, 5 February 2010
Amazing adjectives...
It's hard to avoid the hype surrounding the launch of the Apple iPad. Most people and the media have focused on the product itself and its many features. However, here's a 'phenomenal, amazing and beautiful' study of the adjectives used by Steve Jobs and others during the launch event.
By stripping everything else away, Neil Curtis has revealed the underlying skeleton of the message - repeated adjectives to create 'buzz'. Copy written for online or offline consumption could not sustain this overuse of adjectives. Yet in copy written to be spoken in a video or live event adjectives seem to have an almost subliminal effect. Amazing...
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
The Co-op: good with food, not so good with words
Described in most media reports as a 'victory' for the Plain English Campaign (PEC), the Co-op has been forced to remove the word 'ambient' from labels printed in-store for sausage rolls. While it doesn't make immediate sense to us customers, ambient is a jargon word used in the food industry to describe food and drink that can be stored at room temperature. The Co-op has apparently owned up to an 'administrative error' - another meaningless phrase if ever I heard one - and has apologised for any confusion. I suspect the real reason is that, like many other organisations, the Co-op has simply become blind and deaf to industry jargon.
The story, although slight, has gone global. A quick Google search this morning produced 3,370 hits from news outlets and bloggers. "'Ambient' sausage roll confuses shoppers" was the headline for SBS.com in Australia, confusing it's own readers by publishing an accompanying picture of various sausages rather than sausage rolls.
Of course, the story also provided the media with a great excuse to play with puns. The Express said that the use of the word ambient '...was a description which campaigners found too hard to swallow.' Meanwhile several other sites carried the phrase '...the description took the linguistic biscuit.' This phrase may have originated with PEC, although I haven't been able to find the original source.
No surprise that in the Twittersphere there were around five pages of tweets on the same subject, most of the comments betraying the writers' age with nostalgic references to rave culture and Brian Eno - 'What next? Trip Hop Hot Pot'; 'Drop an E, grab an ambient sausage roll.'
The moral of the tale? Treat jargon like the Jabberwock and beware of '...the jaws that bite, the claws that catch!..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)