Opuscula Who’s killing The language? Ignorant media

>

 

WHEN I WAS IN THE NEWSPAPER BUSINESS — back when Gasoline Alley was fixing flivers — I considered it incumbent upon me to “educate” the reader.

The best way to accomplish this, I believed, was to use correct English language and grammar and to introduce new ideas — for example, the metric system.

I did not always succeed, but I tried.

 

 

THIS MORNING ON THE “NEWS” I heard and read on the tube that “Florida hospitals are busting at the seams.”

What is wrong with that?

I’m bursting to share with you what is wrong.

A “bust” is, according to Merriam-Webster.com

1: art : a sculptured representation of the upper part of the human figure including the head and neck and usually part of the shoulders and breast

2 : the upper part of the human torso between neck and waist especially : the breasts of a woman

Conversely, “burst” is defined by the same source as

1: to break open, apart, or into pieces usually from impact or from pressure from within

2a : to give way from an excess of emotion

b : to give vent suddenly to a repressed emotion burst i

3a : to emerge or spring suddenly

b : launch, plunge

4 : to be filled to the breaking point

As a print media reporter and editor, I suppose it is unfair to expect tv and radio news readers to have any command of the language. Most, I’m informed, have others write the words for them,, ergo, “news readers,” a/k/a “talking heads,” bobble or otherwise.

This is not a matter of University of Chicago/Harvard/GPO vs. Fowler. It is a matter correct use of the language.

 

Teachers cannot teach what they don’t know

Today’s media is not solely (only) to blame for the dreadful state of the language.

Advertising, with few exceptions, is a major contributor. (The exception that comes to mind is an old Winston cigarette commercial about the product’s “taste.”)

I covered courts in California (and elsewhere). One incident I remember was a letter from a collegian (at Chico State, if I recall correctly) who, trying to wiggle out of a traffic ticket wrote a largely unintelligible letter to the judge (who shared it with me as public record). The lad’s mistake: the judge loved the language even more than this scrivener.

Perhaps today’s teachers never learned BASIC English when they were in the primary and secondary grades.

If they don’t KNOW the subject, how can they TEACH the subject?

 

Very unique and other “fox paws”

My Spouse, who has English as her third or fourth language, used to compete with or children (before they grew up and moved out) on who would react fastest when some fool talking head said something was “very” or “most” unique.

The only modifier for “unique” is “almost.” Otherwise, something is, or is not, unique.

Again, from Merriam-Webster.com:

1: being the only one : sole

2a : being without a like or equal : unequaled

b : distinctively characteristic : peculiar sense 1

c : able to be distinguished from all others of its class or type

The last word in the list above, “type” brings to mind a lesson I learned early in my scholastic career.

Types OF, and Kinds OF are not acceptable in proper grammatical society. Rather, rework a sentence such as: There are many “types of” flowers to There are flowers of many types.

Yes, I understand that a former English prime minister and one-time war corespondent is said to have complained about English grammar, up with which I will not put. Still, critics believe he was an accomplished writer. Perhaps not on the order of Hubert Horatio Humphrey or William Francis Buckley, but of some renown.

Among the “fox paws” (faux pas) I most often encounter are misuse of over and under.

Over is above something. Over the rainbow.¹

Under is beneath something. Under the boardwalk.^{2a, 2b}

More than and greater than deal in quantities, measurements. Greater than 500 pounds; more than Mach 2.

Less than is the opposite of “more than and greater than.”

Far too many media mavins (from Hebrew “מבין” or person who understands, an expert) have a problem with “ly” as in “he acted quickly” that become “he acted quick.”

Granted, English is a “living language,” but I would posit that the media personalities and their writers are killing it.

“Professor ‘enry ‘iggings” of My Fair Lady³ nee’ Pygmalion⁴ a fame was correct when he loudly proclaimed: ”Why can’t the English learn to speak . . . the language?”

 

---

 

Sources

1. Over: https://tinyurl.com/nhl8nch

2. Under: a - https://tinyurl.com/ycc7j8e8 b - Ecclesiastes קהלת 1:9

3. My Fair Lady: https://tinyurl.com/yapypcmh

4. Pygmalion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_(play)

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment on ENGLISH

Opuscula POTUS’ mistake: English a barrier To immigration?

A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

This scrivener lives in south Florida where Spanish seems to be the primary language. There are merchants in Dade County (Miami) who only do business in Spanish.

In retail and in all customer-facing positions, including civil service jobs, a command of Spanish is a basic requirement, even if English Is not.

This scrivener has a second language. I went overseas to learn it, working half-a-day to pay for the half-day lessons. I later worked in the country and learned a lot more. (My adult daughter did the same thing. We both returned with spouses and children.)

This scrivener’s mother-in-law, whom I love dearly, speaks very little of the local language; she’s lived in a “language ghetto” since she arrived in country. We barely can communicate (but we manage).

Finally, a quick check of the Internet for ”Free ESL classes in south Florida” turns up dozens of FREE English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. (Substitute “south Florida” for your area.)

Bottom line: Unless a person comes to America at age 90 and has a learning disability, there is no reason a potential immigrant cannot learn basic, “survival skills” English.

But does a potential immigrant absolutely need English to immigrate?

I don’t think so.

Knowing a few words in English beyond “please,” “thank you” and “where’s the bathroom” should be enough to get started.

It takes about five years to go from immigrant to citizen in the U.S. and that certainly is sufficient time to the citizen-to-be to learn rudimentary English; survival level English, enough to shop at a supermarket, to read road signs (that are in many cases international pictographs), to ask — and comprehend — directions, be they for driving from place to place or to perform a job.

For once I agree with the liberals. I don’t think a potential immigrant should be turned away simply because he or she does not speak English. LEARNING English should be a requisite for all immigrants (with very limited exceptions).

Learning English, as thousands of immigrants learned over the years, is the key to becoming “an American.” They worked a job — usually with others who spoke their native language — and learned English when not working.

English IS a difficult language. It’s structure is “strange” when compared to other languages. Most languages I know about put the subject first and the modifiers after, e.g., House. White, Big, while English would be Big White House. Rearranging a sentence’s structure sometimes still gives me pause.

There is a trade-off of sorts. English does away with gender. “You” is neutral, as are most nouns. (I still like “hostess” and “actress”; “host” and “actor” for the distaff side seems strange. I gave up “mailman” for “letter carrier” and “policeman” for “cop” (except for the one I call “son”).

My personal bottom line is that I think POTUS made a mistake with his “immigrants must know English” requirement. From what I have seen, read, and heard from Mr. Trump, the gentleman hardly has a command of the language on a par with Hubert Horatio Humphrey Jr. or Wm. F. Buckley Jr. — providing two opposing — but civil — political points of view.

What about, I have to ask, the person who lacks any opportunity to learn any English before coming to America’s shores? There are countries that learning English can be a severe handicap — sorry, that’s not “PC,” acceptable terminology is presented by the National Disability Authority, a private organization. Seeking out an English teacher in North Korea may not be a wise thing to do. Listening to Voice of America or BBC on shortwave radio and listening to pop music — the way many people learned their first English words — may not be an option.

In my opinion, survival level English should be a requisite for citizenship and it should be a requisite for a driver’s license (despite internationalization of road signs some still require English comprehension), but the lack of English should NOT be a barrier to immigration.

Mr. President, you blew this call.

---

If the links fail to work, see http://tinyurl.com/y82lye4d to learn how to find/access them. It's a Google problem.

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Comments on Immigrants and English