These are about 50:50 pedantic insistence on lost causes (like “data” as plural) and correction of common confusions between similar words (like “home in”). See if you can spot which is which.
Originally shared by Rob Jongschaap
Harvard linguist reveals most misused words in English – Business Insider
‘… Here are some highlights:
Adverse means “detrimental.” It does not mean “averse” or “disinclined.” Correct: “There were adverse effects.” / “I’m not averse to doing that.”
Appraise means to “ascertain the value of.” It does not mean to “apprise” or to “inform.” Correct: “I appraised the jewels.” / “I apprised him of the situation.”
Beg the question means that a statement assumes the truth of what it should be proving; it does not mean to “raise the question.” Correct: “When I asked the dealer why I should pay more for the German car, he said I would be getting ‘German quality,’ but that just begs the question.”
Bemused means “bewildered.” It does not mean “amused.” Correct: “The unnecessarily complex plot left me bemused.” / “The silly comedy amused me.”
Cliché is a noun, not an adjective. The adjective is clichéd. Correct: “Shakespeare used a lot of clichés.” / “The plot was so clichéd.”
Data is a plural count noun not, standardly speaking, a mass noun. [Note: “Data is rarely used as a plural today, just as candelabra and agenda long ago ceased to be plurals,” Pinker writes. “But I still like it.”] Correct: “This datum supports the theory, but many of the other data refute it.”
Depreciate means to “decrease in value.” It does not mean to “deprecate” or to “disparage.” Correct: “My car has depreciated a lot over the years.” / “She deprecated his efforts.”
Disinterested means “unbiased.” It does not mean “uninterested.” Correct: “The dispute should be resolved by a disinterested judge.” / “Why are you so uninterested in my story?”
Enormity refers to extreme evil. It does not mean “enormousness.” [Note: It is acceptable to use it to mean a deplorable enormousness.] Correct: “The enormity of the terrorist bombing brought bystanders to tears.” / “The enormousness of the homework assignment required several hours of work.”
Hone means to “sharpen.” It does not mean to “home in on” or “to converge upon.” Correct: “She honed her writing skills.” / “We’re homing in on a solution.”
Hung means “suspended.” It does not mean “suspended from the neck until dead.” Correct: “I hung the picture on my wall.” / “The prisoner was hanged.”
Ironic means “uncannily incongruent.” It does not mean “inconvenient” or “unfortunate.” Correct: “It was ironic that I forgot my textbook on human memory.” / “It was unfortunate that I forgot my textbook the night before the quiz.”
Nonplussed means “stunned” or “bewildered.” It does not mean “bored” or “unimpressed.” Correct: “The market crash left the experts nonplussed.” / “His market pitch left the investors unimpressed.”
Parameter refers to a variable. It not mean “boundary condition” or “limit.” Correct: “The forecast is based on parameters like inflation and interest rates.” / “We need to work within budgetary limits.”
Phenomena is a plural count noun — not a mass noun. Correct: “The phenomenon was intriguing, but it was only one of many phenomena gathered by the telescope.”
Shrunk, sprung, stunk, and sunk are past participles–not words in the past tense. Correct: “I’ve shrunk my shirt.” / “I shrank my shirt.”
Simplistic means “naively or overly simple.” It does not mean “simple” or “pleasingly simple.” Correct: “His simplistic answer suggested he wasn’t familiar with the material.” / “She liked the chair’s simple look.”
Verbal means “in linguistic form.” It does not mean “oral” or “spoken.” Correct: “Visual memories last longer than verbal ones.”
Effect means “influence”; to effect means “to put into effect”; to affect means either “to influence” or “to fake.” Correct: “They had a big effect on my style.” / “The law effected changes at the school.” / “They affected my style.” / “He affected an air of sophistication to impress her parents.”
Lie (intransitive: lies, lay, has lain) means to “recline”; lay (transitive: lays, laid, has laid) means to “set down”; lie (intransitive: lies, lied, has lied) means to “fib.” Correct: “He lies on the couch all day.” / “He lays a book upon the table.” / “He lies about what he does.”
…’
Interesting. I would argue that after a certain period of time wherein the majority of people use a word or term incorrectly AND consistently (e.g. if everyone started using “dance” to mean “walk” and a new word to mean dance), it becomes the correct use and the old use becomes wrong. That’s how language evolves, and using the old term will be seen as making a mistake. For example, an apron was once a napron, and people mispronounced/mis-wrote it, until using an apron became the correct form and now using a napron is wrong.
Like you say, some of these as pedantic insistence on things that are past saving, as language has moved on.
Still, interesting to see where people make mistakes. =]
Interesting. I would argue that after a certain period of time wherein the majority of people use a word or term incorrectly AND consistently (e.g. if everyone started using “dance” to mean “walk” and a new word to mean dance), it becomes the correct use and the old use becomes wrong. That’s how language evolves, and using the old term will be seen as making a mistake. For example, an apron was once a napron, and people mispronounced/mis-wrote it, until using an apron became the correct form and now using a napron is wrong.
Like you say, some of these as pedantic insistence on things that are past saving, as language has moved on.
Still, interesting to see where people make mistakes. =]
Interesting. I would argue that after a certain period of time wherein the majority of people use a word or term incorrectly AND consistently (e.g. if everyone started using “dance” to mean “walk” and a new word to mean dance), it becomes the correct use and the old use becomes wrong. That’s how language evolves, and using the old term will be seen as making a mistake. For example, an apron was once a napron, and people mispronounced/mis-wrote it, until using an apron became the correct form and now using a napron is wrong.
Like you say, some of these as pedantic insistence on things that are past saving, as language has moved on.
Still, interesting to see where people make mistakes. =]
Interesting. I would argue that after a certain period of time wherein the majority of people use a word or term incorrectly AND consistently (e.g. if everyone started using “dance” to mean “walk” and a new word to mean dance), it becomes the correct use and the old use becomes wrong. That’s how language evolves, and using the old term will be seen as making a mistake. For example, an apron was once a napron, and people mispronounced/mis-wrote it, until using an apron became the correct form and now using a napron is wrong.
Like you say, some of these as pedantic insistence on things that are past saving, as language has moved on.
Still, interesting to see where people make mistakes. =]
Interesting. I would argue that after a certain period of time wherein the majority of people use a word or term incorrectly AND consistently (e.g. if everyone started using “dance” to mean “walk” and a new word to mean dance), it becomes the correct use and the old use becomes wrong. That’s how language evolves, and using the old term will be seen as making a mistake. For example, an apron was once a napron, and people mispronounced/mis-wrote it, until using an apron became the correct form and now using a napron is wrong.
Like you say, some of these as pedantic insistence on things that are past saving, as language has moved on.
Still, interesting to see where people make mistakes. =]
I agree, Steven Nicolas. I think probably enormity/enormousness has passed the point of rescuing it, which is a pity, because we don’t have another word that means exactly what “enormity” originally meant. If I was working as an editor and saw it in someone’s manuscript, I’d still correct it (if it wasn’t in dialog), but it’s commonly used to mean “enormousness” and I don’t think that’s going to stop. Likewise “disinterested”. But I’d still fight for “adverse,” “appraise” and “bemused,” because those are simply cases of people confusing two similar words that have different meanings.
I agree, Steven Nicolas. I think probably enormity/enormousness has passed the point of rescuing it, which is a pity, because we don’t have another word that means exactly what “enormity” originally meant. If I was working as an editor and saw it in someone’s manuscript, I’d still correct it (if it wasn’t in dialog), but it’s commonly used to mean “enormousness” and I don’t think that’s going to stop. Likewise “disinterested”. But I’d still fight for “adverse,” “appraise” and “bemused,” because those are simply cases of people confusing two similar words that have different meanings.
I agree, Steven Nicolas. I think probably enormity/enormousness has passed the point of rescuing it, which is a pity, because we don’t have another word that means exactly what “enormity” originally meant. If I was working as an editor and saw it in someone’s manuscript, I’d still correct it (if it wasn’t in dialog), but it’s commonly used to mean “enormousness” and I don’t think that’s going to stop. Likewise “disinterested”. But I’d still fight for “adverse,” “appraise” and “bemused,” because those are simply cases of people confusing two similar words that have different meanings.
I agree, Steven Nicolas. I think probably enormity/enormousness has passed the point of rescuing it, which is a pity, because we don’t have another word that means exactly what “enormity” originally meant. If I was working as an editor and saw it in someone’s manuscript, I’d still correct it (if it wasn’t in dialog), but it’s commonly used to mean “enormousness” and I don’t think that’s going to stop. Likewise “disinterested”. But I’d still fight for “adverse,” “appraise” and “bemused,” because those are simply cases of people confusing two similar words that have different meanings.
I agree, Steven Nicolas. I think probably enormity/enormousness has passed the point of rescuing it, which is a pity, because we don’t have another word that means exactly what “enormity” originally meant. If I was working as an editor and saw it in someone’s manuscript, I’d still correct it (if it wasn’t in dialog), but it’s commonly used to mean “enormousness” and I don’t think that’s going to stop. Likewise “disinterested”. But I’d still fight for “adverse,” “appraise” and “bemused,” because those are simply cases of people confusing two similar words that have different meanings.
Mike Reeves-McMillan I’d agree with you on enormity. I hadn’t heard the original meaning and wish we still had a word like that, but trying to restore the original meaning would be an impossible task.
I’m not sure about disinterested vs uninterested. Disinterested means you don’t have an interest in something, like not having a stake in it, so you’re impartial, but that’s not very different from not being intrigued by it. I get the difference, but don’t think its big enough to matter.
As for “adverse”, “appraise” and “bemused”, I think they’re like “there, they’re and their” in that people confuse things that are similar, but they shouldn’t. I love the example of confusing “catastrophe” with “cat’s ass trophy” (that is, confusing an awful event with a feline butt mounted on a wall), which nobody seems to do.
Mike Reeves-McMillan I’d agree with you on enormity. I hadn’t heard the original meaning and wish we still had a word like that, but trying to restore the original meaning would be an impossible task.
I’m not sure about disinterested vs uninterested. Disinterested means you don’t have an interest in something, like not having a stake in it, so you’re impartial, but that’s not very different from not being intrigued by it. I get the difference, but don’t think its big enough to matter.
As for “adverse”, “appraise” and “bemused”, I think they’re like “there, they’re and their” in that people confuse things that are similar, but they shouldn’t. I love the example of confusing “catastrophe” with “cat’s ass trophy” (that is, confusing an awful event with a feline butt mounted on a wall), which nobody seems to do.
Mike Reeves-McMillan I’d agree with you on enormity. I hadn’t heard the original meaning and wish we still had a word like that, but trying to restore the original meaning would be an impossible task.
I’m not sure about disinterested vs uninterested. Disinterested means you don’t have an interest in something, like not having a stake in it, so you’re impartial, but that’s not very different from not being intrigued by it. I get the difference, but don’t think its big enough to matter.
As for “adverse”, “appraise” and “bemused”, I think they’re like “there, they’re and their” in that people confuse things that are similar, but they shouldn’t. I love the example of confusing “catastrophe” with “cat’s ass trophy” (that is, confusing an awful event with a feline butt mounted on a wall), which nobody seems to do.
Mike Reeves-McMillan I’d agree with you on enormity. I hadn’t heard the original meaning and wish we still had a word like that, but trying to restore the original meaning would be an impossible task.
I’m not sure about disinterested vs uninterested. Disinterested means you don’t have an interest in something, like not having a stake in it, so you’re impartial, but that’s not very different from not being intrigued by it. I get the difference, but don’t think its big enough to matter.
As for “adverse”, “appraise” and “bemused”, I think they’re like “there, they’re and their” in that people confuse things that are similar, but they shouldn’t. I love the example of confusing “catastrophe” with “cat’s ass trophy” (that is, confusing an awful event with a feline butt mounted on a wall), which nobody seems to do.
Mike Reeves-McMillan I’d agree with you on enormity. I hadn’t heard the original meaning and wish we still had a word like that, but trying to restore the original meaning would be an impossible task.
I’m not sure about disinterested vs uninterested. Disinterested means you don’t have an interest in something, like not having a stake in it, so you’re impartial, but that’s not very different from not being intrigued by it. I get the difference, but don’t think its big enough to matter.
As for “adverse”, “appraise” and “bemused”, I think they’re like “there, they’re and their” in that people confuse things that are similar, but they shouldn’t. I love the example of confusing “catastrophe” with “cat’s ass trophy” (that is, confusing an awful event with a feline butt mounted on a wall), which nobody seems to do.
Datum sounds so dated
Datum sounds so dated
Datum sounds so dated
Datum sounds so dated
Datum sounds so dated