June 11, 2006
Mangled Words
There must be something about being on TV that sends the unconscious message that plainspeak isn’t worthy enough for the all-seeing red eye of the camera. People feel the need to fancify their talk and good, sturdy words are being abducted to other meanings.
A few weeks ago when attorney Joe Cheshire introduced his client, David Evans, the third accused Duke lacrosse player, he kept using the word “respect,” which means to show deference and esteem. Paraphrasing, he told us that David’s parents had shown up, so please have respect for them being here, have respect that we’re requesting no questions after David’s opening statement, have respect that the whole team is showing support for their accused teammates. Clearly, what Cheshire was requesting was “consideration,” but the word doesn’t have the gravitas that respect has.
However, if the exculpatory evidence offered by Cheshire is true, everyone could have been there to pay their respects to the prosecution’s case.
Another misused, or rather, abused word on is “journey,” the act of physically going from Point A to Point B. The word connotes a long, often arduous trip. More importantly, it usually requires one to buy a ticket. But everything on television is a journey. Each failed contestant on Fox TV’s American Inventor breathlessly proclaimed that they were glad they made the journey, no matter how disappointed they were for not making the cut. That’s like saying you’re glad you wound up in Trenton when you were on the train to New York. What they had was an “experience,” not a journey. American Idol winner, Taylor Hicks, told an interviewer that “his experience was a wonderful journey,” which, if journey now means experience, is redundant. His experience wasa wonderful experience.
To be fair, journey sometimes refers to a process or course that is likened to traveling, but it’s usually applied to grand processes, as the journey of life itself, not to submitting a gizmo for consideration to a reality show.
Awesome is another word all over the airwaves. Once used exclusively by teenagers, it’s spread faster than bird flu and shows up eveywhere. Dictionaries define awesom as ‘being full of awe,” which is further defined as “reverence, respect, dread, and wonder inspired by authority, genius, great beauty, sublimity, or might.”
I’ve been taking an improv class at Richard Gardner’s wonderful club in Raleigh, ComedyWorx, and our excellent instructor thought everything we did was “awesome.”
“What character are you playing, John?”
“A pregnant woman.”
“Awesome.”
“Somebody give me a topic.”
“Vegetables.”
“Awesome.”
Meeting God would be awesome. Meeting broccoli might be awesome to a vegan, but it’s nowhere near seeing the God, the Mona Lisa or the Coliseum.
Incidentally, some things are totally awesome. If someone can point out items that are partially awesome or semi-awesome, I’d be grateful. It smacks of someone being a little pregnant.
Everybody on TV is also a genius. Have we become so stupid or insecure about our own intelligence that we call anyone who comes up with something interesting a genius? On TV, everyone from rap singers to bounty hunters are geniuses.
I remember a Johnny Carson anniversary show in which the first guest was Mel Brooks. After his segment, someone sang My Way, but with new, funny lyrics Paul Anka had written that were relevant to Johnny and this particular anniversary. After the song, Johnny opined that Paul Anka was a genius. Mel Brook’s quick retort was, “If Paul Anka’s a genius, what does that make Einstein?”
Little did Mel know. These days, hosts and guests all over the place are calling themselves geniuses. There are so many geniuses out there that the intellectual bell curve must be flattened out on one side.
Insight is defined as the capacity to grasp the hidden nature of things, usually intuitively. A fine word with a fine meaning. It should not, however, be applied to every reporter on television .
“The floods here have devestated New Orleans, Bill, and thousands of people are homeless.”
“Thanks for that insight, Frank.”
Insight? It was information.
“Joe, can you give us some insight on the Canes situation right now?”
“Well, Harley, they lost two games and will have to win tonight in order to tie up the series.”
Wow! If only I could delve into the mysteries of things so … insightfully.
Another fancy sounding word you hear on TV is “closure.” It was first used by commentators to describe the aching need relatives of disappeared victims had for knowledge of what had happened to their loved one. A noble use of the word, this bringing an end to a terrible tragedy. These days, however, everyone on television is making the journey from wanting something to end to wanting closure.
“Will the strike end soon or continue indefinitely?” says the reporter. “An anxious work force is awaiting closure.”
One gets the impression that the workers want closure more than they want their jobs.
A family member keeping vigil over an accident victim relative was interviewed and said he wanted closure. Translated, that means “die or get off the bed.” The word has been cheapened from its elevated use to a fancy way of saying, “When is this damned thing going to be over?” It’s appropriate that it’s the word that brings closure to my list.
As I write this, I have experienced closure on my project of stripping paper off the kitchen walls and painting them. The journey was awesome and we’re asking visitors to respect my efforts by not touching the walls. I offer everyone insight on my brush technique and they all agree that I’m a genius.

Comments(2)
Hey JohnBoni! I’m both too cheap and too lazy to actually hunt down and buy today’s Herald Sun, but laughed out loud when I read the last paragraph of “Mangled Words” on the BoniLogue (great “word”, btw)!
Very true. But is that specific to television? I remember my father complaining of the same thing happening in French newspapers (but, French in general actually). The emerging use of the word “jeune” (young) as a noun even though it is an adjective. The excessive use of “formidable” (terrific). The use of “absolument” (absolutely) and “tout a fait” (entirely) instead of simply “oui” (yes). He was claiming that things were different before, that people used to take better care of respecting language and the meaning of words, and I believed him. But one day I read something from someone in roman times who was having exactly the same complaints. And one day I heard my uncle replying to my father’s complaint that this is the very nature of living languages. They evolve. As a biologist, I tend to agree with my uncle. If languages didn’t evolve, they would be dead. And, if uncontrolled, there is no reason for this evolution to change things towards the most efficient or the most logical. Current French, for example, is a very good example of the amazing lack of logic that can creep into an evolving language. To start with, we actually use for negation a double negation, which in theory should be an affirmation (Je ne veux pas -> I do not want not). The most extreme example I know, for spoken language: when we are astonished, and really wonder what something is or are angry (say, when you catch the dog pooping in the living room), we say “qu’est-ce que c’est que ca?”, which translates into “what is this that that is that that?”. How much better can one do? I think that its great lack of logic is what makes the French language one of the most difficult to learn.
But, we can consciously control the evolution of languages, to make sure that they do not get too messy, and clean them up once in a while, just like the Spanish did (or at least I think I heard they did). Yes, languages might need to be cleaned sometimes. Just like any living thing.