Big Words Make You Look Dumb?
from the Consequences-of-Erudite-Vernacular-Utilized-Irrespective-of-Necessity dept
When I was in junior high school, I had a teacher who tried to encourage students to expand their vocabulary. What she did was encourage students to try out "new words" in any papers they wrote for the class. However, because students aren't always comfortable with those words, we were told to write (new word) after the new word -- parenthetically pointing out that we knew that word might be awkward or flat out wrong. Ever since then, however, I tend to notice when writers use a "big" word where a small one would do and mentally add the (new word) marking to it. According to a new study, I may not be the only one. People notice when writers use large words where small ones will do -- and it doesn't make them think very highly of the writer. In fact, all those attempts to look smart tend to backfire and make people think you're even dumber. It's probably a case where the general awkwardness of the larger words make people feel that the writer is trying too hard. Of course, Clive Thompson (who we link to for this story) has another explanation. He feels that the test, which was done by simply swapping out actual simple words with thesaurus-picked complex ones, modified the original meaning just enough that it didn't feel right -- making people think the writer was less intelligent when, perhaps, a natural writer could use larger words effectively in writing the entire sentence. Perhaps it really depends on the context. In certain types of writing, short words just make more sense than others.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
I agree that writing some thesaurus picked word may be a bad idea when a small word would do, but sometimes (New Words) seem to illustrate the point so much better.
For example, I used the word "Antithesis" the other day in the correct context and boy did my coworkers give me all kinds of crap for it.
I personally enjoy when writers use these words as I can add some new flavor to my vocabulary on occasion.
Of course stringing together a paragraph with a bunch of thesaurus picked words will sound dumb, but these (new words) expand vocabularies and make reading more enjoyable.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
JPerks is right on the dot here and also brings up some unusual things about language nowadays.
A lot of the time, in writing, especially in the collegiate level, people tend to use overly complicated words where a perfectly simple one would have sufficed. Personally, I also use these words but only when the definition catches exactly what I want to express. However, simplicity is always better than complication.
The weird thing is... some people may thing you're tryign to be smart. Even though JPerks may have used antithesis correctly, people might think that JPerks was tryign to be smart and coming off as a pretentious prick.
It's a pretty fine line here... it takes practice to employ decent language to writing or speech. Usually people are more lenient with language over conversation though.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I once told my dad I was "nauseous" when I was 14. In typical red-neck fashion, he replied, "what the hell did you just say?!"
Yeah, I know the feeling...
But there is a difference between actually being smart and just trying to look the part.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Maybe your Dad was expecting you to use the correct word, which would have been 'nauseated'.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
why use a thesaurus?
Heck, I just make up words. Today? Xenocidal,and I didn't notice it until it'd gone out. On the Tyson scale it scores low, thankfully, like pessimal.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
damn you google word of the day
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: why use a thesaurus?
You made up a word and through the power of the internet it is serving a purpose, you are a genius(new word).
xenocide – the slaying of an extraterrestrial person by any other legal person-google
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
How about "plethora"?
I still remember this as a vocabulary word when I was in 8th grade. Seems like for the next 4 years, every kid in class wanted to use it in their essays. If made my ears cringe then, and it still makes me cringe now...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Context
Context is right. Speech, either written or oral, should be geared to the audience for whom it is intended.
Ebonics spoken at a physicians conference makes the speaker sound just as ignorant as the Queens English at a bar in rural Alabama.
Though, we don't need an ill performed study to tell us as much....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: How about "plethora"?
My plethora hurts when I urinate
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Once in a while I'll throw a word out you don't hear very often in everyday speech. I got poked fun of by a friend when I used the word naysayer. They knew what it meant but just hadn't heard anyone use it.
I think the key to "appearing" intelligent in your writing is to tailor it to your audience. If you're speaking to a group of young teenagers it's probably best to leave out words longer than eight letters. On the other hand, if you're speaking to a group of Ivy-League professors I'm sure the word antithesis could fit nicely.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Firefox vocabulary solution
In its default configuration, Firefox helps you to understand any genuine "big word" or new (to you) word you come across:
1) Type Ctrl - T [open a spare tab]
2) Type "dict " [where is replaced by the new word
3) Hit
Voila! The dictionary.reference.com page for the word is displayed.
Congratulations! Your vocabulary is enriched!
(Now if only there was a solution for the grammar!!!)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Firefox vocabulary solution - psuedo tags fixed
In its default configuration, Firefox helps you to understand any genuine "big word" or new (to you) word you come across:
Voila! The dictionary.reference.com page for the word is displayed.
Congratulations! Your vocabulary is enriched!
(Now if only there was a solution for the grammar!!!)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
words are powerful and specificity is a good thing
I'm someone with a very large vocabulary (and pathetic spelling skills). It annoys me when editors suggest more common and less specific words in places where the word I've chosen conveys exactly the meaning I want. I've been known to send editors dictionary pages.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
as i always say: never use a long word when a diminuative one will do.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: How about "plethora"?
BAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Made my morning...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Its true. No matter how you use them, if they aren't neccessary, you look like a moron.
I work with a guy that refuses to use common terms for everything, he'd rather make a sentence as complex as possible. instead of saying "could oyu burn this to a cd for me" he says "could you burn these onto a digitial multimedia form for me?" and sounds like a complete idiot.
I also had a friend once that, when in a debate about one thing or another, would try to win merely by using big words and confusing her opponent.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
did you mean diminutive ? :]
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Looking dumber
Although I agree that there are places where larger words seem awkward, it is most likely because the word is being used improperly or doesn't have the same definition and connotations as the smaller word that could be used. It's not because big words on the whole are awkward.
I must admit, however, that I've never found suitable context for "antidisestablishmentarianism". Perhaps some big words should be restricted to spelling bees and trivia games.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
In your case, I agree; people who call a CD "digital multimedia" or whatever it was need a heaping helping of shut the hell up. They are merely modern-day sophists.
I must beg to differ, however, when it comes to using "bigger" words overall. I don't care whether someone thinks I'm being presumptuous or not. If I feel like saying "fisticuffs" instead of "fight," then I'm saying "fisticuffs." If people have not clairvoyance enough to determine that I'm being jocular, then I want nothing to do with them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Using big words
Sometimes I enjoy using the thesaurus to replace words that seem overused or "boring".
Yet, I wonder...is your writing really effective writing if you are constantly making your reader go to the dictionary to look up words?
I say know your targeted audience well enough to know when to use big words and when not to.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"antidisestablishmentarianism"
if you can spell "establish," you can spell "antidisestablishmentarianism".
the most common error is adding an extra 's' on the 'dis'.
I also believe that a period belongs outside of a quoted word or sentence, unless it is part of the quotation itself.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
Huh? What did you just say...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Hahaha because I, being a teenager, have absolutely no idea what antithesis means. Or naysayer for that matter.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
re: Firefox vocabulary solution
>(Now if only there was a solution for the grammar!!!)
Perhaps you meant to say, "...if only there WERE a solution for the grammar..."
If you're gonna make a comment on a subject like grammar, I would hope that you'd take the time to ensure your own grammar's correctness.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
the meaning of "naysayer" is completely intuitive, or as JSales put it, you need sufficient "clairvoiance" to understand it if you've never heard it before.
antithesis is just as easy. thesis...anti...come on!
here's a challenge: try to pronounce thesaurus. I bet you'll get it wrong ;-)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
"If you're gonna make a comment on a subject like grammar, I would hope that you'd take the time to ensure your own grammar's correctness."
Did he not prove his own point?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
A very important part of the equation was left out of this article: audience.
Any writer worth their salt writes for the audience, and doesn't use big words just for their own sake. There's something to be said for readability and flow.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
re: Zeroth
zeroth, i think there's a difference between informality and just being wrong - that's the difference between jp's note and firefox fan's...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sounds like someone trying to rationalize and make themselves feel better about their lack of understanding of English.
Yes - when someone goes out of the way to use 'big words' it can sound corny - especially when they aren't exactly correct on the definition.
As long as they are used in the proper place and in the proper context, I think they can significantly add to the phraseology of the composition.
lol
*hint* go to www.webster.com and just look them up - try to remember them and you'll actually know what the 'big words' mean...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Spell Check
For the love of , would you people learn to spell check your posts?
I think it is very funny that there are so many posts on using "big words" and so many small words are not spelled correctly.
"Inconceivable!"
"Are you sure you are using that word correctly?"
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hmm - I didnt know about the meta-tags.
I meant to say -
for the love of "[insert deity here]".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"For the love of , would you people learn to spell check your posts? "
No. Get over it. I'm sick of hearing people bitch about this. Its been going for as long as the internet has been wired into the homes of AOL subscribers. The best you can do is STOP BITCHING.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Communication
It is a strange tension in communicating. We write to communicate meaning therefore if the audience dsoesnt know the "big" word it doesnt communicate, yet we have a huge lexicon in order to capture the shades of meaning we want to communicate. Is this a dumbing down issue? Do we pick a basic word with a general meaning to keep from risking usin an unknown word which then has no meaning to the reader even if, had it been known, would have communicating a more exact meaning?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Personally, I like variety in my reading and writing. I feel that the rarity of a word should be in direct proportion to its likelihood of its appearance in a piece. "Penultimate", for example, should not be used more than once per (say) 3 pages. These words stand out and, for me, are distracting when used too many times. Conversely, smaller words or simpler phrases can make both written and spoken language more difficult and bulkier than necessary. Often times they are inappropriate, given the context.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
I'm fond of nauseating, officious prick.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
big words
I'm one of those editors who often replaces big words with small ones. There are two main reasons it happens. One is the appropriate-for-the-audience thing that's been mentioned. The other is that a writer will rely on a thesaurus or dictionary entry for his or her use of the word and not have any actual familiarity with the word and its usage. The frequent result is that the word really isn't appropriately used in the context in which the writer has used it. If marking "(new word)" next to a word one isn't familiar with were standard practice, then maybe we could do such things. But as it is, a writer simply shouldn't use a word for publication unless he or she is clear on both the definition and connotations of the word as it's generally used.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Just look at Penny Arcade
It's a wonderful case-in-point
First, let me say I love Penny Arcade's work.
Now... anyone here who reads the news posts on PA would have notice awhile ago that it seemed Tycho got a word-a-day calendar... and used every single one of those bastards. He uses far, far too many "big words" and comes off looking like a tool.
I love linguistics... hell, I consider myself to be a cunning linguist (hehehe), but I don't want to have to have a damned thesaurus just to read a news post; especially when it's geared for younger audiences.
I know PA has an older fan-base too (like me), but its way over the top with the big words. And I'm not advocating the dumbing-down of communications. But one extreme is as bad as the other.
Tycho, you look like an idiot. Sorry man.
Oh, SKippyboy, the quote is
"Inconceivable!"
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Don't want to sound like a hardass or something, but I love that movie. ;)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"Big" words
It sure sounds like polysyllabic ain't the answer! Know whut ah mean? Or...maybe it are!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
vocabulary
I would settle for people knowing the difference between to, too and two....
Or there, their and they're.
Lose and loose....
Hear and here....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: vocabulary
such an easy task. I agree, if you don't know the difference between every single one of these, you aren't qualified to write ANYTHING, and therefor shouldn't.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: "antidisestablishmentarianism"
You should refer to a standard style guide. Harvard has one as does the United States Printing Office. Both manuals assert that the period belongs inside the quote marks.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Flamsmark
that is so funny
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Dittos
It seems that it depends on the teacher. I had some that want you to use a more elaborate word. It drives me buggy having to read a book and have a dictionary to see what the author meant.
As one of my teachers put it, "Why use a $3 word when a 50 cent one would do?"
Jessie Jackson is a great example of one who uses words that larger than needed. If any of you remember "In Living Color" when they spoofed his speech in trying to explain a statement, "Let me proctolagize myself."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Spelling Nazi
Of course you should NEVER attempt to use big words when you have difficulty SPELLING common words...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Thesaurus
To quote Steven Wright,
"What's another word for thesaurus?"
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Looking dumber
You don't think that this sentence flows nicely???:
"I thoroughly enjoyed the book 'The Catcher in the Rye' if for nothing insomuch its floccinaucinihilipilification of the ideology of antidisestablishmentarianism"
It was the last sentence in an essay my best friend in high school wrote. The teacher gave him an 'A' because she didn't understand the closing sentence...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
clearly you dont need to be clairvoyant to see that you meant you meant clairvoyance....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Spell Check
"Inconceivable!"
"I do not think that means what you think it means."
"Plethora" is funny to me because El Juapo used it in "The Three Amigos." I used it in a high school critique paper, and my english teacher said it really shouldn't be used because it's "trite." Apparently, he had never heard El Juapo say it, but it still tickled me.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
You are sick of people bitching about it?
Well we are tired of spending our hard earned cash in tax dollars to send kids to school so that they can speak ebonics, not learn to spell simple common everday words, and generally fuck up the english language. It takes 30 seconds to glance over a short post to verify that "the" is not spelled "teh" and "trying" is not spelled "tryign". Come on! These are EASY WORDS. Even Microsoft spell check doesn't miss them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: vocabulary
and don't forget its and it's... That is one of my BIGGEST peeves.
Sing it with me.... 'OH, if it's going to be possesive it's just "ITS", but if it's going to be a contraction then it's "IT apostrophe S" Scallawag.'
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Big Words Are Fun!
If a writer wants to use "big words" to show off their erudition I see nothing wrong with it. If you are a skilled enough writer you can use whatever you like and it won't make you feel dumb. I have the opposite feeling when I see a "big word" since most people are too stupid to use them. Of course the word must be applied correctly or the writer does look dumb. As for the "big word" I used in the beginning, it is part of my vocabulary I try to learn a new "big word" every day and use it as often as possible. Besides why does a wrtier care what the reader thinks as long as he is reading the book the writer's job is already done.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Just look at Penny Arcade
when I read "cunning linguist" I pissed my pants...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Big Words Are Fun!
"If you are a skilled enough writer you can use whatever you like and it won't make you feel dumb."
Feel should have been look in that sentence, oops.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Double-plus-good
If a large vocabulary is for idiots, then the Webster's dictionary should be considered illegal.
Works of literature that use complex language should be reformatted in the new "more intelligent" reduced-language -style.
The use of a large vocabulary will be evidence of mental retardation.
In an effort to fix the old, retarded, larger vocabulary system....all previous works of literature, history, and such will be rewritten in this simplistic style, deleting useless details.
Big Brother says thanks to all the communication students who don't take a day out of their lives to read 1984.
People should have more means to express, digest, and communicate other than the conversational/magazine article/internet blog length of expression/thought.
I know, I used some big words.
"Suck on it." Just seemed to lack detail.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
The word is "everyday" not "everday" and both words, ebonics and english, should be capitalized. Maybe you're just "tryign" too hard! Or..., maybe these were just typing errors. Hmmmm... .
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
The word is "everyday" not "everday" and both words, ebonics and english, should be capitalized. Maybe you're just "tryign" too hard! Or..., maybe these were just typing errors. Hmmmm... .
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Where do we go from here?
Where do we draw the line between using a "common" word and a so called "new" word in colloquial conversation? Should we try and dumb ourselves down to facilitate individuals who possess limited vocabularies? Pretty soon we'll be speaking in code, like "haxor" speak, just to make it easier on the people who refuse to learn!
I believe that everyone should try to improve their understanding of their language by experimenting with words that aren't commonly used... in the proper context of course. Please, for the benefit of the English language, read the dictionary, learn some new words, and try to use these newfound words correctly! Do you really want to sound as dumb as everybody else? Where has individuality gone?
Maybe instead of constructing phrases we should shorten our thoughts into a series of numbers that would represent predetermined speech. Why the hell not? It'll be just like ordering a #4 at McDonalds!!! That's an interesting thought, how many of you have already been programmed to know exactly what a McDonalds #4 is? Or perhaps we should just watch commercials on the telly and pick up on catch phrases; at least everybody would know exactly what everybody else is talking about. Remember that whole "wazzzzzup" thing? The corporate programming has already started. Please, PLEASE for the sake of your unborn children... read a friggin' book, learn a new word, and teach the less fortunate.
I hate to bring up George Orwell, but this sounds a lot like "newspeak" to me. And to slightly divert from the subject at hand, I'd also like to bring up how the use of technology has caused penmanship to entropy over the years. Now, seeing how popular instant messages, text messages, and social networking sites have become we don't even need to open our mouths or leave our homes to meet and communicate with people! Call me old fashioned, but I like to look someone in the eye when I communicate.
You know what, I have to stop... I'm becoming vexed, oops I mean incensed, you know daft... what I'm trying to say is that I'm pissed!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Big Words = Pompous Ass
To me, the strategic placement of common words offers greater success to the writer or speaker than does the random placement of uncommon or big words.
I don't know a user of uncommon words who is not a pompous ass. These self-important jerks know full well they are causing confusion. And how is that impressive? Most importantly, how is it effective?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
uh, nauseous is also a word. duh. means about the same thing as nauseated.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Me like'm small
Thankfully so does my girlfriend... *whew*
Wait did I just deviate from the subject matter. I’m apologetic for my deficiency in understanding.
Wow that does sound dumb.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Me like'm small
That's not what she told me...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ray, of course the RANDOM placement of uncommon words makes people look stupid.
If I were to ostentatious RANDOMLY place an uncommon word, as I just have, it makes me look stupid.
When I am talking to an educated group of individuals, saying "That house sure does have some ostentatious woodcarvings in it." sounds about right.
Sure I could have said "elaborate" or "intricate", but if I am sure my audience knows what I am saying then how do I sound like a "Pompous Ass"?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Big Words = Pompous Ass
The phrase "self-important" prompts me to ask the following, shouldn't everyone feel important?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: The Spell Checking Daemon
No, the best thing we can do is not give up the fight. I'm not going to just roll over and accept the retardation of our society just because someone is tired of hearing people fight against it.
Sorry man, not going to happen.
Especially since the retardation is coming from laziness. I know most forums don't have a spell-checker built in. But guess what... word processors do. And the magic power of Copy & Paste means that I don't have to type something twice just to have it in a word processor and in a forum. Either type it in the WP first, spell check, then paste to forum; or, if you're feeling adventurous, type it here, copy it to the word processor, spell check it, then paste it here again.
Stop being lazy.
--This message brought to you by the magic of F7 and [CTRL+C] plus [CTRL+V]--
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Double-plus-good
"'Suck on it.' Just seemed to lack detail."
Thanks for this. It's the only comment on the whole page so far that made me laugh out loud!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Laughing out loud
"--This message brought to you by the magic of F7 and [CTRL+C] plus [CTRL+V]--"
Gave me a great laugh prior to heading home from work.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Nauseous is an adjective,
nauseated is a verb. Why not use the correct word, instead of of something that "means about the same."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Actually the proper use would be, "I was nauseated."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Actually the proper use would be, "I was nauseated."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Double-plus-good
I think some people are drawing the wrong conclusions in regards to some of the intended points made herein.
Orwellian (good name, by the way), what most of us are trying to illustrate is that putting unnecessary words into a sentence, for the sole purpose of 'sounding smarter' or 'sounding more sophisticated', is a bad thing. It is counterproductive and confusing (intentionally so, sometimes).
I am not advocating the dumbing-down or retardation of our society by making all media use smaller words. I am advocating the proper use of larger words. Using a larger word to make a more colorful point is great. Using larger words for circumlocution is bad.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Webster's
from Webster's
"nauseous...
1 : causing nausea or disgust : NAUSEATING
2 : affected with nausea or disgust
- nau·seous·ly adverb
- nau·seous·ness noun
usage Those who insist that nauseous can properly be used only in sense 1 and that in sense 2 it is an error for nauseated are mistaken. Current evidence shows these facts: nauseous is most frequently used to mean physically affected with nausea, usually after a linking verb such as feel or become; figurative use is quite a bit less frequent. Use of nauseous in sense 1 is much more often figurative than literal, and this use appears to be losing ground to nauseating. Nauseated is used more widely than nauseous in sense 2."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Where do we go from here?
A good example of improper use of 'larger' or 'less common' words:
Entropy is a noun (see here). I believe the word you were intending is atrophy.
I don't like being an anal-retentive correction-monger, but that was a prime example of incorrectly using a less-than-common word in an 'everyday conversation'.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: vocabulary
Here in Taiwan, they have a big problem with merry, mary, and marry.
Last Christmas I sawa a sign that read: Marry Christmas!
At the beach a place where you could ask someone to marry you read: Will you merry me?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re:Imprper use of "nauseous"
See page 543, Modern American Usage:
"nauseous (inducing nausea) for nauseated (experiencing nausea) is becoming so common that to call it an error is to exaggerate. Even so, careful writers follow the traditional distinction in formal writing: what is nauseus makes one feel nauseated."
This is exactly what this conversation is about, the proper use of words. If we are going to use more complex words, then we ought to take the time to figure out what they mean and use them in the proper content.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: vocabulary
So zeroth, was your misuse of "therefor" because you don't know how to use the word, or was it a failure to spell check?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
In your example, the label only adheres itself if you understood what I wrote but pretended confusion in order to forward your lofty position as one who speaks to educated audiences.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Where do we go from here?
Dear Bill,
I heart you. Will you merry me?
Oh wait, you already have! Delightful raillery!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This is interesting. Using many words makes you sound pretentious. There, I used a big word. Wow. Now I'm dumb. This article makes little sense, since it seems to cover at least two different problems/situations.
Some people may feel stigmatised by your choice of words, since you're making them feel inferior, therefore making you sound "better than them".
There is, of course, another possibility, you could be cramming in useless words hoping to sound smarter in which case, you sound like a moron. The message is, use your brain and make sure the message reaches the receiver. If you're talking to some academics, use a different style than if you're talking to professionals.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Write to your audience...
If you're writing to an educated, erudite audience, then 'big' words are fine. If not, you just look pompous.
That is, if you're writing for book-learned, "smart people", then high-falutin' words are the bomb. Otherwise, you're just dorkin'.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This whole conversation is making me feel nauseated.
Being a teenager is no excuse for not knowing what "naysayer" or "antithesis" means...take a break from the video games and read a book once in a while.
When I was your age, I would have surelly been mocked for not knowing such simple vocabulary. What exactly are we teaching kids in school these days, anyway?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re:
Nauseous means tends to nauseate.
Nauseated means you feel sick.
Nauseating is essentially a synonym for nauseous.
Read the USAGE NOTE at the bottom of this page:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nauseous
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Its projection. You use a "big word" I don't
understand and I'm too lazy to look it up.
So /you/ must be dumb!
Lemme axe you sump'n... when did knowing
stuff qualify a person as dumb?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Looking dumber
I learned this word in 6th grade Catholic school and I am truely happy to see it finally used in print : )
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Double-plus-good
Well said, George.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Spontenaity
I find it amusing how self-conscious people are about vocabulary. The number of posts this subject provoked is the evidence offered for that observation. In writing, it is important to consider audience and good form, but not so much that the writer cannot inject some personality into what they are saying, there should be limits to the tyranny of doing things "correctly". On the other hand, in conversation, use the word that comes to mind and if someone cannot follow, they are either lazy, ignorant, jealous or disabled. Be kind to the disabled, inform the ignorant, compell the lazy and openly jeer mock and abuse those who deride you for using the vocabulary you possess, they are simply responding like a schoolyard bully when confronted with someone else's refinements. There is little excuse for abusing people for knoweing what they are talking about. On the rare occassion where someone is trying to put on airs, interrogating them on the finer points of their utterances will usually quell their presumption to impress through pretense. Just my opinions on the matter.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Big Words - phewy on them
I believe an intelligent and secure person can take a complex subject and turn it into words the least educated person can understand. Those that aren't truly intelligent have to memorize vocabulary lists to try to make themselves seem superior to their audience. It depends a bit on your audience. If you are talking to a bunch of medical doctors and "dumb down" the technical talk, you'd be laughed at, but to talk to average people using huge words for no reason is just silly!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: vocabulary
>>At the beach a place where you could ask someone to marry you read: Will you merry me?
That sounds dirty.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Who needs it?
Who needs a sesquipedalian vocabulary when you can speak like a total idiot and still become President of the United States?
BTW, one of my favorite bumper stickers is, "Eschew Obfuscation".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Write to your audience...
If you're writing to an educated, erudite audience, then 'big' words are fine. If not, you just look pompous.
That is, if you're writing for book-learned, "smart people", then high-falutin' words are the bomb. Otherwise, you're just dorkin'.
w00t!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I think we should all go to Tim Allen style of grunts and noises.
"uh-uh" (translation: want that)
"rowl-l" (trans: That is a very pretty lady)
"AII-OOH-GAA!" (trans: That is one hot momma!)
"Ahhhhhh!" (trans: The hot momma just did permanent damage to me.")
It works for babies.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: The Spell Checking Daemon
Your jihad against misspellings, which apparently extends to postings in the comment section for blog sites, is farcical.
The fact that people don't take the time to spell-check every little piece of communication they put out for consumption does not give any credence to your portrayal of the 'retardation of society'.
People may indeed be getting dumber by the year, although I doubt it, but the fact remains that all forms of communciation have different standards (and always have) when it comes to appropriate levels of correctness, whether it be punctuation, grammar, capitalization, abbreviations, and yes, spelling. An article in a medical journal should be more formal than a novel, which should be more formal than an article in an entertainment magazine, which should be more formal than a business correspondence, which should be more formal than a love letter, etc. etc. And the fact remains that certain technological developments, most notably email, IMs and yes, blogs, have added more layers to this phenomenon by typically placing greater importance on the speed of communication over grammatical precision.
Frankly, since this is a blog for a reasonably intelligent and generally thoughtful audience, I do think that a little care should be taken when posting a comment, but that's primarily a self-interested stance since I just don't want to come across as an idiot. However, I am an anonymous coward, so who the fuck cares, really, and I'm certainly not going to get my panties in a bunch if someone fills a post with misspellings because they're in a hurry?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Audience awareness isn't the only priority, by far
I think tailoring one's language with the priority being simplicity to the audience (be them MENSA or morons), guided by the fear of being labeled 'dumb' by using a challenging vocabulary, is just the sort of 'contempt for the intelligentsia' crap (disguised as 'stupid chic') that makes totalitarian societies.
A few people have tried to explain the difference between what the article says:"big words are stupid"
and the truth: "big words, used out of context, are stupid".
The story, especially the headline, fails to make this distinction. It suggests some people are retarded enough to believe a thesaurus is a book of redundant words, as opposed to similar ones. Hopefully, no one had to pay someone to state the obvious.
If I had to consider how stupid everyone else around me was (or how dumb I am) every time I opened my mouth, why say anything?
Here's what I think:
1)English teacher with spare time makes stupid program (with thesaurus data file that he lifted from someone else, who's gonna write their own thesaurus?) to state obvious point.
2)fairly useless geek site gets story and publishes 2 paragraphs on it.
3)"tech" overview site (like techdirt) cites the geek site and says basically the same 2 paragraphs with a link
4)we argue like sea monkeys about a subject that deserves pages of discourse, maybe deserving a few big words...nothing happens...everyone is right. No real opinions are made. Everyone thinks they're a friggin' genius and we all go to sleep feeling like we're Albert Einstein's/Gertrude Stein's lost love-child: "Dumbass Einstein-Stein".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Stilted Criteria
Why has no one said anything against the Way that study was conducted? It was set up to Prove the point it was supposed to be "investigating".
Quoting: "Daniel Oppenheimer . . . took a handful of writing samples and used a thesaurus to replace the simple words with needlessly flowery ones"
"He created a "highly complex" version of each original text by replacing each noun, verb and adjective in it with the longest synomym."
So he intentionally Made it Look like a pretentious poser was writing. What if he used another sample of text where the Big Word was used properly, perhaps by a respected professionsl writer?
Let's not take the wrong lesson here, which most previous posters seem to be focussed on.
He did not show that Big Words make you look stupid. He showed that OVERUSE does that, just as it ruins almost everything.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Supercalifragilisticexpialodocious!<