Archive for November, 2008
November 22nd, 2008
Occasionally there’s method in my madness. In my previous offering, I used “A cohort comprised 300 to 600 soldiers.” Now I want to talk about “comprise.”
It means “contain,” “embrace,” “include.” It should always be used in the active voice. In other words, it should never be “is comprised of.”
With “comprise,” the sum comes first, then the parts.
As expressed simply by John B. Bremner in “Words on Words”:
“The whole comprises the parts.” For alternative verbs, “The parts compose (constitute, make up) the whole.”
Despite this fairly simple concept, “comprise” is one of the most frequently misused words in English. In fact, we had an editor here at the newspaper who finally banned its use because we kept getting it wrong. That’s certainly one way to do it.
November 21st, 2008
I’ve been seeing quite a few “cohorts” lately, which probably would have been a sign of war in Roman times. “Cohort” is from the Latin “cohors,” meaning “enclosure, enclosed company, hence retinue, crowd.”
For the Romans it had a specific military application: A cohort comprised 300 to 600 soldiers, one-tenth of a legion. Many centuries after the demise of the Roman Empire, “cohort” became acceptable in nonmilitary uses, but it still meant a group with some common characteristic.
In the past two dozen years or so, “cohort” has been marching toward an additional application: as a synonym for “associate,” “colleague,” “supporter,” “conspirator,” “accomplice” and so on, thus going from up to 600 people to just one person. That would be an expansion and a reduction at the same time.
Most language experts frown on this use for an individual, considering it highly informal at best. However, Webster’s lists two such definitions with no caution about their acceptability.
It’s probably inevitable that this aspect will acquire additional respectability in the near future. For now, you may want to avoid it, depending on which cohort(s) you’re hanging out with.
November 20th, 2008
“Limbus,” Latin for “edge” or “border,” is still used to mean “a distinct border or edging, often of a contrasting color, as of a body organ.”
Most of us are more familiar with a word derived from this edgy concept, “limbo” — and not the dance kind. “Limbo” is “any intermediate, indeterminate state” or “a place or condition of confinement, neglect or oblivion” — not a good place to be.
In certain Christian theologies, says Webster’s, a capitalized Limbo is where the souls of infants and people who led fairly good lives but were still tarred by original sin would reside — forever. In another view, it’s “the temporary abode or state of all holy souls after death, before the coming of Christ.” It’s not hell, but it’s not heaven, either. It could be permanent, it could be temporary.
It’s the ultimate in being on the edge.
As for the dancing limbo, that name probably came from the word “limber,” which you have to be to do it well. The idea is to see how low you can go beneath a bar. In this case, the bar for success is raised by lowering a bar.
But bear in mind: Lower than Limbo is hell.
November 19th, 2008
Have you started your gift shopping? Does someone on your list want any of those specially packaged bundles of movies or TV shows? Does your list say “box set” or “boxed set”?
The latter seems more logical, but “box” can be an adjective meaning “packaged in a box,” which is certainly appropriate. And a quick scan of the Internet indicates that both terms are in wide use. I don’t know whether one seems to sell better than the other. If it does, the word will get out and that is what everyone will use.
Chances are, even if you prefer “boxed,” many people will think you’re saying “box” anyway. That “-ed” is one of the most difficult sound bites to hear in English. Witness, for example, how many people leave the “d” (or “-ed”) off “used,” “supposed” and “old-fashioned.”
And will “iced tea” finally go the way of “iced water” and “iced cream”? Only time — and usage — will tell.
November 16th, 2008
Earlier in the week I promised “Judy” that I would blog about “good” and “well.” Then the Internet went down. But now it’s back, and so am I.
As for her specific example of “you done good,” I have been known to say that myself, but only for comic effect — because it’s dreadfully wrong. (If you hope to be funny when saying things like that, be sure of your audience.)
However, if you use the right verb tense, it can be correct to say “you did good,” if the praise is for a deed that benefits others. This is where the informal “do-gooder” comes from.
“You did well” means something else: The praise is then directed at the performance, not a result of it.
My sons do well in school. As Boy Scouts, they also get to do good.
Most problems with “good” (an adjective) and “well” (usually an adverb) arise with the use of “linking verbs” (also called “copulative”), principally “be,” “become,” “appear,” “seem,” “feel,” “sound,” “taste,” and sometimes “get” and “grow.”
The usual examples involve “feel”:
“I feel good” and “I feel bad” can be comments on my mood or my health.
By contrast, some argue, “feel badly” and “feel well” refer to the sense of touch, although such usage would have to be rare.
Actually, using “feel well” in reference to a person’s health is acceptable idiom.
I like to think of “feeling good” as a state of mind and “feeling well” as a state of health.
I would stay away from “feel badly” altogether.
A word of caution: As Mark Davidson points out in “Right, Wrong, and Risky,” just memorizing a list of linking verbs can still get you into trouble, because some them also can act as “action verbs.”
For example, “feel strong” refers to physical condition, while “feel strongly” is about emotions.
I hope this helps you feel better about “good” and “well.” If so, all’s well that ends well — unless it’s good.
November 15th, 2008
Regular readers of Associated Press stories may have noticed this. The wire service has altered its style on first reference to U.S. presidents. It will now include the first name, so it’s President George W. Bush, not just President Bush. This change took effect Thursday morning.
The official reason was consistency with its style for other world leaders.
This change makes sense for other reasons, too
After eight years of having to distinguish between W. and his dad, it’s somewhat second nature. And it’s not just the Bushes: We’ve also had two presidents named Adams, two named Harrison, two Johnsons and two Roosevelts, as well as two separate terms of a Cleveland with one of the Harrisons in between.
Another possible factor: With Americans’ knowledge of history rapidly deteriorating, maybe the AP hopes to fill in some gaps.
It can’t hurt to try.
November 12th, 2008
Bugs has five quarters. Daffy has nine dimes. Bugs has fewer coins, but Daffy has less money.
Bugs also has two $10 bills. Daffy has three $5 bills. Bugs has fewer bills — in fact, he has one less bill — but Daffy has less dollars (in the sense of total wealth).
So am I just being Looney? No, there’s a point here. In the world of comparative language, “more” always works, but items considered as individual things require “fewer” and things considered collectively take “less.”
Here’s a helpful passage from “Words on Words” by John B. Bremner:
“The sense of collective quantity prevails in sums of money, periods of time, measures of distance and weight: less than $200 a week, less than six months, less than three miles, less than 200 pounds.”
One exception, an example of which I inserted between dashes above: When the difference in amounts is down to one, “fewer” doesn’t work at all. It should be “one less.” Now I have one less thing to write about.
November 11th, 2008
The first definition of the adverb “then” (rhymes with “when”) is “at that time.” It can refer to the past (”Life was harder then”) or the future (”Life will be much better then”). ”Then” can be any time except now, although they do work together in “now and then” to mean “occasionally.”
“Then” also can be used “with conjunctive force” to mean “in that case; therefore; accordingly,” as in “If you decide not to go, then I’ll have to ask someone else.”
Too often it gets confused with the actual conjunction “than” (rhymes with “pan”), which is principally used for comparisons. Whenever you’re rating two things or groups, and one is more, less, bigger, taller, heavier, prettier and so on, you need “than,” not “then.”
Here’s an example using both:
“I once thought no one could talk more than she does, but then I met you.”
If a sentence contains “more” or “less” (or “fewer”) or a word ending in “-er,” there probably should be a “than” nearby.
November 10th, 2008
The use of “due to” to mean “because of” is one of those things that cause great gnashing of teeth among most grammarians.
The accepted use of “due to” is when it can be replaced by “caused by,” which usually happens when it follows a form of “to be.” For example, “She said the drop in temperatures was due to a shift in the jet stream.” You could replace “due to” with “caused by” there.
In contrast, in “He said he lost the election due to a bad campaign strategy,” replacing “due to” with “caused by” seems to be saying the election, not the loss, Â was caused by the bad strategy — if it’s saying anything intelligible. In such cases, replace “due to” with “because of.”
The widespread misuse of “due to” may someday overwhelm this distinction. But for now, the safest bet is to save the phrase for the sense of “scheduled” or “expected”: “The game is due to begin in an hour.” The “to” is actually working with the verb “begin” instead of with “due.” As far as I know, no one objects to that use.
November 7th, 2008
Much of our idiom springs from combining verbs with different prepositions to mean different things. For example, notice how “talk out” differs from “talk out of.”
A subtle one that’s often misused is “connect to.” Traditionally, “connect to” is for actual physical hookups, as with wiring or pipes: “The developer promised the subdivision would be connected to the sewer system soon.”
For hooking up with people, groups or ideas, use “connect with”: “They say he’s connected with the mob.”
If you have connections, they’re probably the “with” kind, unless you’re connected to some type of medical device. Of course, in that case, you have more important issues to deal with.
Previous Posts
