[Dixonary] OT: Amusing Article

[Guerri Stevens]

Some of you might enjoy the "Casual" column in the July 26 issud of the
"Weekly Standard". It is about the ways in which we use language these days.

--
Guerri

[Dodi Schultz]

Guerri Stevens wrote:

> Some of you might enjoy the "Casual" column in the July 26 issud of
> the "Weekly Standard". It is about the ways in which we use language
> these days.

No link?

Never mind; I guess we can find it . . .

[Dodi Schultz]

Okay, here's the link for the piece mentioned by Guerri:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/war-words

Not exactly amusing, if you're as annoyed as the writer is by malusage.

--Dodi

[Christopher Carson]

Excellent piece! I think I'll reach out to my colleagues who have issues
with language and pass it on. <lol>

Chris


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Guerri Stevens" <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 3:07 PM
To: "Google Dixonary" <dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Subject: [Dixonary] OT: Amusing Article

> Some of you might enjoy the "Casual" column in the July 26 issud of the
> "Weekly Standard". It is about the ways in which we use language these
> days.
>
> --
> Guerri
>
>

[EnDash@aol.com]

Interesting. I've printed out a copy for our son, who teaches English and
Philosophy at the British International School of Cairo and is currently
visiting with us.

-- Dick


In a message dated 7/22/2010 3:08:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com writes:

Some of you might enjoy the "Casual" column in the July 26 issud of the
"Weekly Standard". It is about the ways in which we use language these
days.

--
Guerri

[Dodi Schultz]

Chris wrote:

> Excellent piece! I think I'll reach out to my colleagues who have
> issues with language and pass it on.

;-)

[Daniel B. Widdis]

CC> I think I'll reach out to my colleagues

Wasn't that an AT&T ad campaign back in the 80's? "Reach out and touch
someone" or something like that? It could be, perhaps, they were really
successful in getting "reach out" to mean "make a long distance call using
AT&T" but then everybody forgot which long distance carrier to use.

Unless they were iPhone owners forced to use AT&T when they'd rather pick
someone else.

And speaking of iPhone, and another OT aside, if anyone has one and the
"Words with friends" app (scrabble-like game), feel free to challenge
"dbwiddis" to a game. :)

--
Dan

[Guerri Stevens]

No link because I read it in print - didn't know it was available online!

Guerri

Dodi Schultz wrote:
> Guerri Stevens wrote:
>
>> Some of you might enjoy the "Casual" column in the July 26 issud of
>> the "Weekly Standard". It is about the ways in which we use language
>> these days.
>
> No link?
>
> Never mind; I guess we can find it . . .
>
>
>
>

[Dodi Schultz]

> No link because I read it in print - didn't know it was available online!
>
> Guerri

Gee, isn't just about everything? Anyway: We do have the link now.

--Dodi

[Guerri Stevens]

Yes, practically everything *is* online, but I still tend not to think
of that, especially when I am reading the print version.

Guerri

Dodi Schultz wrote:
>
>> No link because I read it in print - didn't know it was available online!
>>
>> Guerri
>
> Gee, isn't just about everything? Anyway: We do have the link now.
>
> --Dodi
>
>
>

[Guerri Stevens]

Yes, that "reach out ..." was an AT&T ad.

Guerri

Daniel B. Widdis wrote:
> CC> I think I'll reach out to my colleagues
>
> Wasn't that an AT&T ad campaign back in the 80's? "Reach out and touch
> someone" or something like that? It could be, perhaps, they were really
> successful in getting "reach out" to mean "make a long distance call using
> AT&T" but then everybody forgot which long distance carrier to use.
> ...

[Guerri Stevens]

"Amusing" was probably not the best term for it. He doesn't even mention
one of my pet peeves, which is the excessive use of the word "need".

Don't know if you've ever read any of Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe mysteries.
Nero Wolfe did not like the word "contact" as in "I'll contact him". I
suppose if those books were being written today, Nero would disapprove
of "reach out to" instead.

Guerri

Dodi Schultz wrote:
>
> Okay, here's the link for the piece mentioned by Guerri:
>
> http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/war-words
>
> Not exactly amusing, if you're as annoyed as the writer is by malusage.
>
> --Dodi
>
>

[Dodi Schultz]

Guerri Stevens wrote:

> "Amusing" was probably not the best term for it. He doesn't even
> mention one of my pet peeves, which is the excessive use of the word
> "need".

Yeah, one gets that a lot from people who should simply be saying
"Please." As in, "I need you to fill out this form."

> Don't know if you've ever read any of Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe
> mysteries. Nero Wolfe did not like the word "contact" as in "I'll
> contact him". I suppose if those books were being written today, Nero
> would disapprove of "reach out to" instead.

And a whole lot of other things, too. "Contact" in that sense has pretty
much been accepted (as has the onetime bugaboo "hopefully" to mean "one
hopes that..."). But some things still aren't acceptable, and as editors
are dispensed with, we find such horrors as the confusion of "affect"
and "effect" (NYTimes couple of weeks back) and someone "laying" on a
bed (Wall St Journal the other day). Grrr.

--Dodi