Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Wasron,jfgw,Rhyd6,eyeball08,Wondergirly, for Donating to support the site

Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

Grumpy Old Lemons Like You
swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7991
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 991 times
Been thanked: 3659 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565557

Postby swill453 » February 1st, 2023, 4:27 pm

UncleEbenezer wrote:
swill453 wrote:Then you get to the situation where something like "literally" loses its meaning ("he literally killed me"), but what word can you use when you do mean literally?

Have you ever considered how "literally" took on its meaning? I'd imagine it arises from the authority of the written word, in an era when literacy carried authority.

No, it seems it more from "letter by letter", i.e. "to the letter of the language".

Scott.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10439
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3644 times
Been thanked: 5272 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565560

Postby Arborbridge » February 1st, 2023, 4:28 pm

swill453 wrote:
Lootman wrote:A fun aspect of this is how so-called misused words can become common and so ultimately be "correct".

Thanks to a couple of US presidents I now often hear "decider" and "bigly" used.

"The use of "I could care less" in place of "I could not care less" is another.

Use the "wrong" word enough and it becomes "right". :D

Then you get to the situation where something like "literally" loses its meaning ("he literally killed me"), but what word can you use when you do mean literally?


I think people take this too literally.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2067 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565565

Postby pje16 » February 1st, 2023, 4:41 pm

swill453 wrote:
pje16 wrote:
UncleEbenezer wrote:"Decider" was routinely used in my childhood, half a century ago.

The only time I use it is when 2 team/players are level in, say, a best of five
it is the 5th game

Is there any other meaning?

Scott.

yep
A person who makes the decisions in a particular situation: The president is the decider in these matters.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18956
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 639 times
Been thanked: 6690 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565568

Postby Lootman » February 1st, 2023, 4:51 pm

pje16 wrote:
Lootman wrote:Use the “wrong” word enough and it becomes “right”. :D

I keep hearing “myself” and “yourself” instead of "me" and "you" from dunces and those who should know better,
that will never be correct ;)

But words do change meanings over time, sometimes ending up meaning the exact opposite of their original meaning.

pje16 wrote:
swill453 wrote:
pje16 wrote:
UncleEbenezer wrote:"Decider" was routinely used in my childhood, half a century ago.

The only time I use it is when 2 team/players are level in, say, a best of five
it is the 5th game

Is there any other meaning?

yep
A person who makes the decisions in a particular situation: The president is the decider in these matters.

Yes, the 'new" sense of the word "decider" is to use it about a person, not a thing or event. As when Bush Junior declared that "I am the decider".

Tedx
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2075
Joined: December 14th, 2022, 10:59 am
Has thanked: 1849 times
Been thanked: 1489 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565572

Postby Tedx » February 1st, 2023, 4:55 pm

Or an Irish fellas asking 'for a glass of....' an apple flavoured refreshing alcoholic drink.

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7991
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 991 times
Been thanked: 3659 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565577

Postby swill453 » February 1st, 2023, 5:07 pm

Things definitely change through use. Apparently the FT style guide has just announced that henceforth "data" is always singular, not plural - "the data shows that..." etc.

https://twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/ ... 2202291203

Scott.

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7211
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1672 times
Been thanked: 3842 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565605

Postby Mike4 » February 1st, 2023, 6:34 pm

pje16 wrote:
swill453 wrote:The day one of my, previously respected, work colleagues used the phrase "reaching out" non-ironically was when I decided I needed to retire.

Scott.

You've missed out the biggest cringe

Blue sky thinking :o


Nah, I'd nominate as a bigger cringe "You have two choices"...

NO I DON'T, I have one choice, with two options!!

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8292
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 919 times
Been thanked: 4138 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565607

Postby tjh290633 » February 1st, 2023, 6:44 pm

You know, I sometimes feel that people insert needless phrases in their speech.

I do abhor the American "Nucular", though.

TJH

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2067 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565610

Postby pje16 » February 1st, 2023, 6:51 pm

tjh290633 wrote:You know, I sometimes feel that people insert needless phrases in their speech.

I do abhor the American "Nucular", though.

TJH

that's George Bush :lol:

doolally
Lemon Slice
Posts: 647
Joined: February 8th, 2021, 10:55 am
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 513 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565626

Postby doolally » February 1st, 2023, 7:39 pm

And another trend over the past few years.......
Someone being interviewed on TV.
Interviewer asks a simple question, like "Do you think nurses should get more pay?"
Interviewee: "Yeah, no, well, blah blah blah"
doolally

staffordian
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2300
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 4:20 pm
Has thanked: 1900 times
Been thanked: 870 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565657

Postby staffordian » February 1st, 2023, 10:05 pm

doolally wrote:And another trend over the past few years.......
Someone being interviewed on TV.
Interviewer asks a simple question, like "Do you think nurses should get more pay?"
Interviewee: "Yeah, no, well, blah blah blah"
doolally

I've seen an increasing use of 'Yes' as a response to a question which demands a descriptive answer.

I first noticed it when Bradley Wiggins answered questions after the 2012 Olympics. He was asked something along the lines of 'How are you feeling?' and he started his reply with 'Yeah...' followed by quite a pause. I think he then got round to actually answering it in some way or another.

But once I'd noticed it, I found it cropping up regularly, and it annoys me :(

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8416
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4490 times
Been thanked: 3621 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565681

Postby servodude » February 2nd, 2023, 5:19 am

swill453 wrote:Things definitely change through use. Apparently the FT style guide has just announced that henceforth "data" is always singular, not plural - "the data shows that..." etc.

https://twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/ ... 2202291203

Scott.


At uni in Sweden my supervisor convinced me (and "strongly advised") that I should treat data as singular when writing (even formally) in English.

His point was that it was sufficienly common usage that if I used it "properly" I would distract both camps of readers; it would confuse the camp who did not understand it was a plural, and the other camp that did understand were likely to notice I had got it right to the detriment of what I was writing about.

I took his advice as he'd properly learnt the language like and thought about it more that us what were just brung up on it.

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8151
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2897 times
Been thanked: 3986 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565724

Postby bungeejumper » February 2nd, 2023, 8:59 am

staffordian wrote:I first noticed it when Bradley Wiggins answered questions after the 2012 Olympics. He was asked something along the lines of 'How are you feeling?' and he started his reply with 'Yeah...' followed by quite a pause. I think he then got round to actually answering it in some way or another.

But once I'd noticed it, I found it cropping up regularly, and it annoys me :(

Yeah but no but yeah but.... :D

I suspect that the "yeah" is really just a gap-filler that's there to fill the space while the speaker thinks of something more substantive to say to the questioner. Especially when he/she is on camera. If you fail to come up with an instant response, the interviewer might just move the microphone on to somebody else, so you fill the void between your mental gear changes with anything that comes to hand.

And although the habit does seem to be getting more widespread these days, we all do it to some extent, and we always have. In Britain, we're likely to say "Well..." In German it would be "Tja..." And the French would throw in an "Oh" (or "Or"), or maybe a dozen other lazy Gallic interjections.

I'm as guilty as anybody. I once did a live TV interview that I knew was being transmitted coast to coast across North America, and when the (fairly random) questions came at me I used a fair few of those little space-filler words, just to keep myself in the game. When I replayed the video afterwards, it was a relief to see that I hadn't used too many "errrrs", but as a viewer I probably wouldn't even have noticed my momentary hesitations.

Like...... ;)

BJ

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8416
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4490 times
Been thanked: 3621 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565731

Postby servodude » February 2nd, 2023, 9:11 am

bungeejumper wrote:
staffordian wrote:I first noticed it when Bradley Wiggins answered questions after the 2012 Olympics. He was asked something along the lines of 'How are you feeling?' and he started his reply with 'Yeah...' followed by quite a pause. I think he then got round to actually answering it in some way or another.

But once I'd noticed it, I found it cropping up regularly, and it annoys me :(

Yeah but no but yeah but.... :D

I suspect that the "yeah" is really just a gap-filler that's there to fill the space while the speaker thinks of something more substantive to say to the questioner. Especially when he/she is on camera. If you fail to come up with an instant response, the interviewer might just move the microphone on to somebody else, so you fill the void between your mental gear changes with anything that comes to hand.

And although the habit does seem to be getting more widespread these days, we all do it to some extent, and we always have. In Britain, we're likely to say "Well..." In German it would be "Tja..." And the French would throw in an "Oh" (or "Or"), or maybe a dozen other lazy Gallic interjections.

I'm as guilty as anybody. I once did a live TV interview that I knew was being transmitted coast to coast across North America, and when the (fairly random) questions came at me I used a fair few of those little space-filler words, just to keep myself in the game. When I replayed the video afterwards, it was a relief to see that I hadn't used too many "errrrs", but as a viewer I probably wouldn't even have noticed my momentary hesitations.

Like...... ;)

BJ


For sure
It's "phatic" communication, just time wasting.

The one that really makes me notice it is the sharp intake of breath from Orcadians or Scandis (often older women) that acknowledges they're listening to you - but sounds like disapproval from your weedgie mum

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8292
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 919 times
Been thanked: 4138 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565738

Postby tjh290633 » February 2nd, 2023, 9:25 am

bungeejumper wrote:
staffordian wrote:I first noticed it when Bradley Wiggins answered questions after the 2012 Olympics. He was asked something along the lines of 'How are you feeling?' and he started his reply with 'Yeah...' followed by quite a pause. I think he then got round to actually answering it in some way or another.

But once I'd noticed it, I found it cropping up regularly, and it annoys me :(

Yeah but no but yeah but.... :D

I suspect that the "yeah" is really just a gap-filler that's there to fill the space while the speaker thinks of something more substantive to say to the questioner. Especially when he/she is on camera. If you fail to come up with an instant response, the interviewer might just move the microphone on to somebody else, so you fill the void between your mental gear changes with anything that comes to hand.

And although the habit does seem to be getting more widespread these days, we all do it to some extent, and we always have. In Britain, we're likely to say "Well..." In German it would be "Tja..." And the French would throw in an "Oh" (or "Or"), or maybe a dozen other lazy Gallic interjections.

I'm as guilty as anybody. I once did a live TV interview that I knew was being transmitted coast to coast across North America, and when the (fairly random) questions came at me I used a fair few of those little space-filler words, just to keep myself in the game. When I replayed the video afterwards, it was a relief to see that I hadn't used too many "errrrs", but as a viewer I probably wouldn't even have noticed my momentary hesitations.

Like...... ;)

BJ

I was a member of a College Society, where newly inducted members were required to express their thanks "in a few well chosen but broken words". The speech ended at the first well, err or um. One lawyer went on for several minutes. Ideally on word was enough.

TJH

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10439
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3644 times
Been thanked: 5272 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565740

Postby Arborbridge » February 2nd, 2023, 9:27 am

And so.....

How many times does one hear someone start a sentence with "So,...." Often politicians being interviewed will begin "So, what we are saying is....".

There have been interviews in which almost every response begins with this annoying little word.


Arb.

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10818
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1472 times
Been thanked: 3007 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565763

Postby UncleEbenezer » February 2nd, 2023, 10:12 am

swill453 wrote:Things definitely change through use. Apparently the FT style guide has just announced that henceforth "data" is always singular, not plural - "the data shows that..." etc.

https://twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/ ... 2202291203

Scott.

Mildly irritating, but not half as gross as "datums" for a plural. :evil: Let alone pluralising words that are already plural!

But these aren't really affectations, they're abominations!

kiloran
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4112
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:24 am
Has thanked: 3254 times
Been thanked: 2856 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565765

Postby kiloran » February 2nd, 2023, 10:15 am

Arborbridge wrote:And so.....

How many times does one hear someone start a sentence with "So,...." Often politicians being interviewed will begin "So, what we are saying is....".

There have been interviews in which almost every response begins with this annoying little word.

Arb.

Ah, the ITV news people (Peston, Bradby, Hills, etc). Everything starts with "So..." or often "Look..."
Grrrr

--kiloran

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8416
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4490 times
Been thanked: 3621 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565774

Postby servodude » February 2nd, 2023, 10:42 am

UncleEbenezer wrote:
swill453 wrote:Things definitely change through use. Apparently the FT style guide has just announced that henceforth "data" is always singular, not plural - "the data shows that..." etc.

https://twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/ ... 2202291203

Scott.

Mildly irritating, but not half as gross as "datums" for a plural. :evil: Let alone pluralising words that are already plural!

But these aren't really affectations, they're abominations!


Yeah but fewer (given they are discrete) than half the listed affections have been :roll:
It's been folk getting stuff wrong or different

For a real... nails on a chalkboard... affectation in an English speaker I'll offer the "pause to prevent interruption"

We're tuned to the rhythm of our language and THIS affectation is intentionally designed to mess with the listener.. and specifically their chance of interjection
- I first noticed it in Tony Blair

It's pretty common now.

The UN... natural pause in... a sentence so that you... can breathe without letting some...one...get a word... in.

Obviously taught - much like my arteries when I hear it...

-sd

Watis
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1423
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 356 times
Been thanked: 500 times

Re: Unnecessary Speech Affectations.

#565790

Postby Watis » February 2nd, 2023, 11:34 am

servodude wrote:
UncleEbenezer wrote:
swill453 wrote:Things definitely change through use. Apparently the FT style guide has just announced that henceforth "data" is always singular, not plural - "the data shows that..." etc.

https://twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/ ... 2202291203

Scott.

Mildly irritating, but not half as gross as "datums" for a plural. :evil: Let alone pluralising words that are already plural!

But these aren't really affectations, they're abominations!


Yeah but fewer (given they are discrete) than half the listed affections have been :roll:
It's been folk getting stuff wrong or different

For a real... nails on a chalkboard... affectation in an English speaker I'll offer the "pause to prevent interruption"

We're tuned to the rhythm of our language and THIS affectation is intentionally designed to mess with the listener.. and specifically their chance of interjection
- I first noticed it in Tony Blair

It's pretty common now.

The UN... natural pause in... a sentence so that you... can breathe without letting some...one...get a word... in.

Obviously taught - much like my arteries when I hear it...

-sd


This pause thing really annoys me. Even in situations where there's no prospect of interruption - news stories or documentaries for example - there will be pauses....and then a final emphasis...on the last.... TWO WORDS!

None of us talk like that in real life, so why do they do it on the telly?

The opposite of the pause - much favoured by politicians - is NOT to pause between sentences, again to remove the opportunity to interject.

Watis


Return to “Bitter Lemons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests