Surprising. Gratifying. Worthy of additional comments. So here’s another dozen.
Of all the rantings I’ve published in this distinguished magazine, none ever generated the outpouring of response to match the column on improper word use (“A Modest Proposal,” January). It’s a pleasure to know that others out there care about the difference between professional communication and borderline literacy masquerading as “creative work.”
(Occasionally, as in this issue of DIRECT, I have a feature article, “The Word Store.” The two aren’t parallel. “The Word Store,” on page 43, is explanatory. This one is defamatory.)
What spurs me to reprise the act is an ad in my local newspaper which has in its subhead, “If you loath the thought of…” Uh-uh. “Loath” is an adjective. You gotta add an “e” to make it “loathe.” OK, that’s a minor way of swinging into gear.
Miserable Communication No. 1: What’s more aggressively obnoxious is the misuse of “I” and “me.” When someone uses the phrase “between you and I,” don’t you want to barf, not only because it’s a hideous misuse of language but also because there’s a phony, pretentious touch of would-be elegance that doesn’t come off?
Miserable Communication No. 2: We’ve covered and re-covered the generally acceptable, if rough-edged, “It’s me”…and the less acceptable “I’m him.” I had an e-mail asking what I think of the response “This is him” or “This is her” when we phone somebody. Oh, that’s easy: Execrable. (Don’t you feel a tad of admiration and pleasure when the person you call says, “This is he” or “This is she”? Try it yourself and sense your callers swooning.)
Miserable Communication No. 3: Watching interviews with one of those marble-mouthed athletes is excellent grist for our curmudgeon-mill. Here’s a baseball player being congratulated by an interviewer who, with typical sloth-like intellect, asked: “How does it feel to hit two home runs in one game?” (Interviewers whose imaginations are limited to “How does it feel” questions should be shipped to unidentified destinations in Afghanistan.) The answer: “Yeah, I did good.” I grant you, “I did good” is superior to “I done good,” just as a broken leg is superior to a broken neck.
Miserable Communication No. 4: Then we have “In regards to.” Oops. “Regards” are what we send to people who know how to use the language. Why not salute grammar with “In regard to.” Some prefer “With regard to.” Give either of those folks my regards, together with the caution that these are antiques from the same box as “Your servant, sir” and “Dear Sir or Madame.”
Miserable Communication No. 5: As the Monty Python troupe used to say, “And now for something completely different.” What’s different is the use of the word “different.” In the good old U.S.A., the preferred idiom is “different from.” Here comes “different than,” like the creeping blight. Please: Preserve and protect. In the U.K., it’s “different to,” so don’t try to correct the grammar of a civilization that spoke English while we were still burbling “Me Tumac.”
Miserable Communication No. 6: Oh, then we see “anyways” instead of “anyway.” Or, in the squashing-together mode that seems to be so popular today based on space-free Web addresses, we see “anyway” used when the writer means “any way.” Yep, that parallels “everyday” as a dumb substitute for “every day.”
While we’re discussing the Web, how do you spell Web site? Do you allow a space between the two pieces? I discussed this with two of my book editors and both said they prefer two words, but note that word “prefer.” I’m with the editors, but I guess you won’t be shot down in flames for using “Website.”
Miserable Communication No. 7: Uh-oh. A company I admire just sent an e-mail offer for some edible delicacies, including “Julianne Carrots.” All right, all right, you claim nobody knows the difference between “Julianne” and “Julienne.” Don’t suggest that to Julianne Moore. (Or maybe she dyed her hair to that contemporary carrot-color.)
Miserable Communication No. 8: Is there any point discussing the difference between “farther” and “further”? Probably not.
Miserable Communication No. 9: Then there’s the hopelessness of “these kind of glasses” and “those kind of shoes.” I certainly hope you won’t hire anyone whose command of language is that hopeless.
Miserable Communication No. 10: Tell me your teeth grind when you see “loose” used when the writer’s 70-IQ brain meant “lose.” If you have such perpetrators on your creative staff, please lose them by cutting them loose.
Miserable Communication No. 11: Don’t you think of someone who’s dressed in a tuxedo he found in a garbage bin when you read or hear, “On behalf of John and myself,” or, “On behalf of Mary and myself”? “Myself” in that usage isn’t a synonym for “I” or “me”; it’s a synonym for “I’m trying to be important.”
Miserable Communication No. 12: I have space for one of my Pet Hates, and it’s more a matter of pomposity than one of grammar: “at this point in time.” If you use that, ask yourself why you’re adding fat and lard to “at this time,” which itself isn’t all that conversational.
I know I’m preaching to the choir, but maybe — just maybe — a copy of DIRECT will filter down into the hands of a previously happy savage who will say, “I didn’t know I’ve been miserable. I guess I’d better change.” Excelsior!
HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS is the principal of Lewis Enterprises in Fort Lauderdale, FL. He consults with and writes direct response copy for clients worldwide. Among his 26 books are “Marketing Mayhem” and the just-published “Effective E-mail Marketing.”
Network
