Stand aside! Grammar Police coming through!

[MooseMom]

When did "aggression" turn into "aggressiveness"?

Since I watch a lot of sports, I've noticed that more and more broadcasters are appreciating an athlete's "aggressiveness".  I just figured that sports broadcasters are dumb.

But then I heard Rachel Maddow make note of someone's "aggressiveness", and my ears really perked up.  You might not agree with her political views, but you can't deny that she is well educated. I was gobsmacked when I heard her use that word.

My husband and I now take great sport in noting other such instances of "ion" becoming "iveness.  I can't think of any others offhand, but the next time I hear one, I'll post about it.

Oh, here's one.  "Attention" became "attentiveness".

OK, I know this is a really trivial thing, but I'm bored.  It's either this or empty the dishwasher.

[Hemodoc]

Better than washing socks.

[MooseMom]

Better than washing socks.

Already did that.   

[cariad]

I'm confused. Both are recognised nouns in the dictionary, so I should think that they're interchangeable. Perhaps it just hits you wrong? I have many such examples having lived with Gwyn and his constant Britishy speech (the nerve!)

Orientate. This was one of my first clues, back in the day, that we would be having many semantic battles. I asked him 'why not just say orient?' and he had no answer. Specialism instead of speciality just sounds ridiculous to me.

One that irritates the living flip out of me, and this is American as apple pie, is when someone says, always in a pop-psychology, new-agey context "we had a disconnect". I always want to shake them and say "disconnection! You had a disconnection! Use the bloody noun!" (I just checked Merriam-Webster and it does not list disconnect as a noun, and this has done nothing to calm my frustration with that usage.)

There were some atrocious misnomers used back when I worked for the state with loads of social workers. One that my friend and I thought hilarious was 'donator'.  I found myself eventually saying donator, too, and then donor started to sound wrong. It's hard to fight that sort of linguistic assault. (Also, spell check recognises the word 'donator' so I guess it's actually an accepted variant. Huh. Well, it shouldn't be.) Many of the less-sharp ones would say 'flustrated'. I thought it was a joke at first, one of those cutesy made-up words. And then there's heighth. Heighth??!! You cannot be serious.

Now, not to pick, but dumb for stupid is not one I use as I think of that word first and foremost as a medical condition, the inability to speak. We had 'dumb cane' in pots in our home growing up in SoCal, and it was called this because if you broke a leaf and ingested any of the serum inside, your tongue would swell up horribly.

Can you tell I'm waiting for the engineer to come by to fix a few issues with the flat? Oh, and do not get Gwyn started on calling the maintenance people 'engineers'. That one really gets his knickers in a twist.

[willowtreewren]

In this part of the country even well-educated people use the past tense for many words instead of the present perfect as in: Those windows need cleaned. Or those socks need washed. ARGH! I would be able to retire if I had a dollar for each time I have heard that usage.

The other one that gets me is the use of "sell" for "sale." I have a canoe that I will put on sell. 

Sigh.....

Cariad, I get even more upset when I see orientate in text or (gasp) during Masterpiece Theater. No! No! No!

Aleta

[Poppylicious]

Orientate. This was one of my first clues, back in the day, that we would be having many semantic battles. I asked him 'why not just say orient?' and he had no answer. Specialism instead of speciality just sounds ridiculous to me.

Orient just means Asia to me.  Orientate (orientating/orientated) would be my choice if I were talking about positioning myself or something.  My specialism is Religion (because I have a degree in it) and my speciality is Shepherd's Pie (because I make a very tasty one).

I hate 'gotten' with a passion so deep that it makes me feel genuinely nauseous whenever I hear or read it.  The fact that it's now becoming more popular over here is horrifying for me.

The word burglarized makes me laugh (affectionately). What's wrong with just being burgled?

 

[cariad]

Aleta, glad to hear I'm not the only one with orientate! I despise the "clothes need washed" usage, too.

MM, this issue is really stuck in my head now (better than the endless chorus of When I Grow Up that has been there, uninvited, for weeks) so I'm going to amend my previous statement. I am not sure I can get this explanation out of my brain coherently, but I'll give it the college try.

In thinking it over, I don't think aggression and aggressiveness are quite the same thing. In a sport context, I tend to believe that 'aggressiveness' is probably the correct usage. It is a noun from the word "aggressive" which means you are displaying qualities of aggression, but not necessarily aggression. Aggression I think of as a violent, angry act, whereas aggressiveness is more about being proactive and taking the offense in a situation where violence would be inappropriate. I searched for 'aggressiveness' on IHD and it came up with a few people talking about their aggressiveness in seeking treatment. I don't think one would say "my aggression in seeking treatment". I think it's a softer way of saying "wow, that footballer has really shown some extra determination to win" vs. "wow, that footballer just went mental and punched his manager straight in the eye." The first I would call aggressiveness, the second aggression.

With attention and attentiveness, it's probably similar. You wouldn't say to a group of kids "give me your attentiveness" and I think that's because you want the actual thing from them, not just the behaviour one displays when paying attention. I probably have used "attentiveness" when discussing my boys with teachers, as in "he shows a lack of attentiveness": he does not appear to be paying attention, he is not demonstrating this behavioural trait to me on a regular basis. I don't think I would say "he shows a lack of attention", because that suggests something specific to me, like I should be able to rattle off all the times I've seen him not following directions closely. "Lack of attention" would be more something I could see myself saying to a doctor.

See? That didn't come out so well. But I assure you, I know what I mean!

[cariad]

Orient just means Asia to me.  Orientate (orientating/orientated) would be my choice if I were talking about positioning myself or something.  My specialism is Religion (because I have a degree in it) and my speciality is Shepherd's Pie (because I make a very tasty one).

Yes, as a noun, Orient does mean the Far East, but it is also a verb. "I took a moment to orient myself". Similar to "burgled" vs "burglarized" or "used" vs. "utilized", there is an easier way!

I hate 'gotten' with a passion so deep that it makes me feel genuinely nauseous whenever I hear or read it.  The fact that it's now becoming more popular over here is horrifying for me.

Wow, how on earth do you stand any of the American authors then? Nauseous?

Specialism sounds uneducated to me, but that's just because the word is not used in the US and therefore it sounds like the person doesn't know the correct word. For schools, I don't think they have a word that is used like 'specialism'. Focus? Concentration? Or just "we specialize in".

As a kid I used to immediately dismiss other children as uneducated if they used "ain't". Then a friend gave me one of these daily calendars with a word-a-day, and it would talk about how dictionaries had committees that would discuss proper usage, pronunciation, or whether a word should even be considered a word. I seem to remember that only 86% of the committee members felt that "ain't" was not a real word. I would have thought that that would be one word they could all agree is just wrong. But then languages are constantly in flux, probably more now than ever, so maybe ain't will have its high-profile champion one day. I think so much of what is considered proper in speech and writing is just a product of snobbery or bigotry. Would anyone allow their children to be taught to speak and write BSE in school? (Black Standard English). Doubt it.

[cariad]

I've written Merriam-Webster asking for clarification. I had to, or I feared I would never sleep again.

Will let you know if they reply.

[MooseMom]

Uh oh.  Once we start going down the path of American vs British usages of words and phrases, things get murky (but fun).

Re "aggression" vs "aggressiveness", I do understand that both are nouns, and as such one would think they would be used interchangeably.  But if you look at the use of these terms in a sociolinguistic context, at least within the world of American sports, I can assure you that "aggressiveness" as a substitute for "aggression" is quite new.  Even my husband picked it up and remarked how strange it sounded.  I think we all at least subliminally hear a change in the use of words and phrases as time goes on, and this switch from "ion" to "iveness" is probably just one of those linguistic evolutionary changes.  It just seems to have happened so quickly!  But there is very little creativity in the world of sports broadcasting, so once a word is used in a certain way or a new phrase is coined, by the following weekend, everyone is using it.

Famous example:  There is a radio DJ here in Chicago named Tom Waddle.  He played for the Bears (NFL) for a while, and now he does some work for the NFL network.  He is also on ESPN in Chicago and until just a month or so ago, he did a Sunday night sports roundup show on local TV.

A few years ago, he was commenting on this very subject of blither blather spewing from the mouths of sportscasters.  So he decided to make up a new phrase, "Boom goes the dynamite!" to be shouted when something good happens, like the scoring of a touchdown or the hit of a home run.  It was his own linguistic experiment.  He wanted to see how quickly it would catch on, and as you might have guessed, it didn't take long.  My husband and I happened to be watching that particular show when he explained what he planned to do, and these few years later, we laugh every time we hear "Boom goes the dynamite!!" shouted by a national sports broadcaster!  So my theory is that someone, somewhere tripped over their tongue and used "aggressiveness" instead of "aggression", and it has stuck.

Oh, I just thought of another one.  A sportscaster was commenting on a player's "physicalness" when, in the past, he would have talked about that player's "physicality". 

I subscribe to the e-edition of The Economist which is a British publication, and I am always shocked to read "we reckon".  To my ear, that sounds uneducated, but there it is each week in The Economist.

But yes, language is a living, evolving thing, even more so with people travelling and spending time reading online posts from people from all walks of life.  I am constantly amazed by how much British slang and general usage of certain phrases I hear in the American media.  I gasped in astonishment the first time I heard an American say "w**ker".  Any my husband nearly falls into a coma every time he sees "judgment" spelled "judgement".  He insists that's incorrect, and when I explain that it is the British spelling, well, he splutters even more in indignation.

[MooseMom]

I've written Merriam-Webster asking for clarification. I had to, or I feared I would never sleep again.

Will let you know if they reply.

What, about "disconnect" as a noun?  I've never heard it as a noun, so I must not be as American as apple pie!  LOL!  Or perhaps I'm just not very new agey.  So I'll be interested if you hear from them.

[MooseMom]

In this part of the country even well-educated people use the past tense for many words instead of the present perfect as in: Those windows need cleaned. Or those socks need washed. ARGH! I would be able to retire if I had a dollar for each time I have heard that usage.

Oh, that's interesting!  I've never heard that!

The other one that gets me is the use of "sell" for "sale." I have a canoe that I will put on sell. 

That's just an incorrect use of the word "sell".  That happens everywhere, unfortunately.

[Willis]

My pet grammar peeve is when "less" or "lesser" is used rather than "few" or "fewer" when comparing discrete vs. continuous items.

"It seems there are less pigeons here today than normal." NOT. "There are fewer pigeons!"

 

[cariad]

Re "aggression" vs "aggressiveness", I do understand that both are nouns, and as such one would think they would be used interchangeably.  But if you look at the use of these terms in a sociolinguistic context, at least within the world of American sports, I can assure you that "aggressiveness" as a substitute for "aggression" is quite new. 

OK, but then why did you find it shocking that Rachel Maddow used aggressiveness, given her educated status?

I never noticed that about judgment or judgement. My spell check accepts both, but I could swear it used to correct me with judgement. I am naturally an awful speller because I cannot be arsed with these details, and I don't believe in correcting my kids spelling nor grammar because I think it's not the best way to pick up either. (I also think kid-spelling and odd word-usage is so cute and absolutely fascinating. I will never forget Aidan drawing a picture and writing 'chruc' underneath. Pronounce it, you'll know what he drew.) My kids both scored lower on their writing SATS than I would have expected because they assess grammar and spelling. Sorry, boys. That's what you get for having a mom who loves having a front-row seat to the wonders of language acquisition.  

[willowtreewren]

My pet grammar peeve is when "less" or "lesser" is used rather than "few" or "fewer" when comparing discrete vs. continuous items.

"It seems there are less pigeons here today than normal." NOT. "There are fewer pigeons!"

 

Willis, my understanding of the use of "less" and "fewer" is that you use the former for uncountable amounts and the latter for countable amounts. In that was you would have fewer pigeons (because they can be counted), but less milk (because it isn't counted). On the other hand, you might drink fewer glasses of milk if you wanted to consume less milk! 

And fewer pigeons will result in less guano.

Maybe I misunderstood your post! It wouldn't be the first time!

[MooseMom]

I've just heard someone on The Cycle say, "In politics, that would be 'Boom goes the dynamite!'."  haha

[Willis]

My pet grammar peeve is when "less" or "lesser" is used rather than "few" or "fewer" when comparing discrete vs. continuous items.

"It seems there are less pigeons here today than normal." NOT. "There are fewer pigeons!"

 

Willis, my understanding of the use of "less" and "fewer" is that you use the former for uncountable amounts and the latter for countable amounts. In that was you would have fewer pigeons (because they can be counted), but less milk (because it isn't counted). On the other hand, you might drink fewer glasses of milk if you wanted to consume less milk! 

And fewer pigeons will result in less guano.

Maybe I misunderstood your post! It wouldn't be the first time!

You didn't miss it...that's correct. "Discrete" items means individual. countable items or amounts. "Continuous" refers to objects that can't be individually identified such as your milk. Now at SOME level if the milk could be counted by the drop, then each drop would be a discrete item. So looking at milk in a bottle we would say there is more or less milk, but a half-full bottle will have fewer (discrete) drops of milk than a full one!

 

[MooseMom]

I am naturally an awful speller because I cannot be arsed with these details, and I don't believe in correcting my kids spelling nor grammar because I think it's not the best way to pick up either. (I also think kid-spelling and odd word-usage is so cute and absolutely fascinating. I will never forget Aidan drawing a picture and writing 'chruc' underneath. Pronounce it, you'll know what he drew.) My kids both scored lower on their writing SATS than I would have expected because they assess grammar and spelling. Sorry, boys. That's what you get for having a mom who loves having a front-row seat to the wonders of language acquisition.

Really?  You can't be arsed with the details of correct spelling and grammar?  There comes a point where kid-spelling is no longer cute, like when you write up your CV.

[cariad]

I am naturally an awful speller because I cannot be arsed with these details, and I don't believe in correcting my kids spelling nor grammar because I think it's not the best way to pick up either. (I also think kid-spelling and odd word-usage is so cute and absolutely fascinating. I will never forget Aidan drawing a picture and writing 'chruc' underneath. Pronounce it, you'll know what he drew.) My kids both scored lower on their writing SATS than I would have expected because they assess grammar and spelling. Sorry, boys. That's what you get for having a mom who loves having a front-row seat to the wonders of language acquisition.

Really?  You can't be arsed with the details of correct spelling and grammar?  There comes a point where kid-spelling is no longer cute, like when you write up your CV.

My standing over them correcting them and nagging them does not work as countless child development experts will tell you. What does work is exposure to the language, primarily through reading, which my kids do a lot. Do you really think that when my kids go to write up their CVs that there will be much chance that their spelling won't be up to par? Spelling is already automated for anyone who cares to avail themselves of those tools, which I generally do, but if you entered me in a spelling bee I would quickly lose. My grammar is quite good, too, and I model that for my boys every day. I am not a grammar teacher, this is the school's job. Happily, their school did not 'teach to the test' and I am proud of myself for not getting worked up about the results of a silly government assessment. They still both scored above grade level, and Aidan was the first (and to date only) 6 in math that the school's current year 6 teacher had ever seen. Those boys have absolutely nothing to worry about academically. There will come a point where they will have to want to do it correctly, but if you think I'm going to fuel my kids' perfectionism by badgering them at 7 and 10 about misspelling words here and there, you have completely misjudged my parenting style. The more organically they can acquire these skills and the more self-determined it is, the more it will stick.

I'm still confused about whether you are saying that using 'aggressiveness' is the mark of an uneducated speaker. At first that's what I thought you were saying, but now you seem to only view it as an interesting display of just how insular the world of sports broadcasting is.

[MooseMom]

Gosh, Cariad.  No need to go into attack mode.  I know you are proud of your boys and all, but you don't need to defend anything to me.
 
This wasn't supposed to be a conversation about your boys or your parenting style. 

I'm not au fait with current thinking within the circles of child development experts as my own parenting experience defies description.  I'll leave the "expertness" to you.

[cariad]

Gosh, Cariad.  No need to go into attack mode.  I know you are proud of your boys and all, but you don't need to defend anything to me.
 
This wasn't supposed to be a conversation about your boys or your parenting style. 

I'm not au fait with current thinking within the circles of child development experts as my own parenting experience defies description.  I'll leave the "expertness" to you.

Your comment insinuated that I was failing my children and dooming their job prospects by not acting as some sort of grammar/spelling watchdog. Frankly, it felt like you were attacking me over my lighthearted description of my parenting. If you did not want to turn it in to a discussion of my boys or my parenting, why make that reply at all while ignoring my second attempt to clarify whether you think using 'aggressiveness' is incorrect or just quirky?

My reply was not meant as an attack but most certainly was meant to defend my choices as a parent.

[paris]

The phase that gets me going is " for all intensive purposes".   What?   It is "for all intents and purposes".   The first way doesn't even make sense!!    Funny what little words or phrases catch our attention.

[MooseMom]

I think "aggressiveness" is incorrect.  I had never heard this word spoken until just recently.  I had never seen it in print.  But I do realize that what I judge to be incorrect today may well be viewed as correct as language evolves.

Your parenting style is of no interest to me which is why I don't understand your need to attack.  I do not understand your defensiveness in this regard.  Perhaps you see insult where there is none.  My husband can be like that, and he'll be the first to admit it.  You have always made it very clear how highly you regard knowledge and education and intellectual investigation, so to see you post that you don't pay much attention to spelling came as a surprise as the printed word is such an important conduit through which knowledge passes.  I never made reference to your boys.  I merely repeated your phrase "kid-spelling", yet somehow this conversation has become about your children and you as their parent.

[MooseMom]

The phase that gets me going is " for all intensive purposes".   What?   It is "for all intents and purposes".   The first way doesn't even make sense!!    Funny what little words or phrases catch our attention.

LOL!  That's a good one! 

[Jean]

My fave is a word I heard one day at Starbucks. Conversate. What? I think it means we are going to talk to each other, but I am none too sure.

Cariad, Moose Mom was only surprised at your statement. So was I. Everyone knows how highly you value your children and their education and training.