Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Which Word Wednesday: Metonym vs. Synonym

Posted by erinstraza under culture, language | Tags: , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=peter+roget&num=10&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&biw=1499&bih=664&tbm=isch&tbnid=c3Wm64gPeE0k3M:&imgrefurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/roget_peter_mark.shtml&docid=HNAAZPYqzRcmiM&imgurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/images/roget_peter_mark.jpg&w=136&h=185&ei=T64WT47GOKqqsQKB0d2yAg&zoom=1

Thanks, Peter!

Happy Thesaurus Day! Today is the day we observe the word treasury that was written by Peter Roget, born January 18, 1779. Roget’s Thesaurus was first published in April 1852, which begs the question: What did writers do to find synonyms before then?! I, for one, am happy to be living on this side of 1852.

How will I celebrate this felicity? I just may crack out a gift the Hubster gave me last year, The Thinker’s Thesaurus. It’s a mega-Thesaurus. I highly recommend it.

Another merriment on tap here at The Patch is Which Word Wednesday. Isn’t it fun that Thesaurus Day falls on Wednesday this year?! We get to celebrate the holiday and a word match up all at once.

In honor of the Peter’s birthday, we’ll consider metonym vs. synonym. Here are the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

metonym :: noun
a word, name, or expression used as a substitute for something else with which it is closely associated

synonym :: noun
a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language

Both nouns refer to words that can be used to substitute other words. Word association is key—you should be able to use one word or the other with the intended meaning remaining the same.

A metonym is the term for words that are more general or loosely associated with each other. The OAD expounds: “For example, Washington is a metonym for the federal government of the U.S.”

A synonym is the term for words that are near substitutes for one another. Once again, the OAD provides insight: “For example shut is a synonym of close.”

Roget’s Thesaurus as well as The Thinker’s Thesaurus are sources to turn to when you need help finding that perfect word to communicate clearly. But I see the classic version as the source for synonyms and the lesser-known version as the source for metonyms. For example, if we look at the word creative, we find the following entries:

The Thesaurus offers 11 options for substitution in its entry:
inventive, imaginative, innovative, experimental, original; artistic, expressive, inspired, visionary; enterprising, resourceful

The Thinker’s Thesaurus offers two loosely related words in its entry:
(1) and/or original adj.: Promethean [Prometheus was the Titan god of forethought, who, based on some legends, was entrusted with the task of molding mankind out of clay.]

(2) as in resourceful person n.: debrouillard [French].

What’s my WWW verdict? If you are looking for basic substitutions to avoid repetitive speech, use a Thesaurus; if you need a witty term or reference, check out The Thinker’s Thesaurus.

What’s your verdict? Are you a Thesaurus reader? Will you celebrate Thesaurus Day? Do share in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

 

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Imply vs. Infer

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

As much as I enjoy learning about words and communicating through writing and speaking, I can’t call myself an expert communicator. Too often I choose the wrong word and send the wrong message . . . and once it’s out there, it’s difficult to adjust (unless I have lots of grace in the bank with the audience!).

But even the most carefully crafted message can be improperly decoded. In the end, both the sender and the receiver must work together for good communication and understanding. That’s what makes relationship so wonderfully unpredictable!

Today’s Which Word Wednesday match up is all about communication. Let’s start with the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

imply :: verb
strongly suggest the truth or existence of (something not expressly stated)

infer :: verb
deduce or conclude (information) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements

Here we have two actions related to the communication and processing of information. I think of imply as something I do when I communicate and infer as something I take in when others communicate. Ron Evans says the same in his The Artful Nuance: “Roughly, speakers imply, but hearers infer.”1

In both of cases, communication can be either helped or hindered. If I am implying something without saying it outright, a deeper communication can be reached, if the receiver actually catches what I mean. This is the classic “beating around the bush” form of communication. But if the recipient doesn’t catch what I’m implying, I may assume understanding where there is none.

Likewise, if I correctly infer that someone is implying something to me beyond what the words state, I can gain deeper insight. But if I infer something the sender never intended, the result could be disastrous.

What’s my WWW verdict? Straightforward communication is best, but not always easy.

What’s your verdict? Do you have regular communication blunders? When is the last time you infer something that wasn’t implied? Do share in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 126.

 

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Despise vs. Hate

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , |
1 Comment 

I know, I know. It’s Christmas. The season of love and joy. So this week’s Which Word Wednesday match up is not a good fit for the intended mood of the season.

But the entry caught my eye as I flipped through one of my word resource books today. And after reading the definitions for these two words, I found that I was using despise improperly. eek!! Certainly I can’t be the only one (?). Consider this my Christmas gift to you, that I would care enough to set us all straight. (ahem.)

Here are the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

despise :: verb
feel contempt or a deep repugnance for

hate :: verb
feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone)

It seems that despise is more about scorn and disapproval. I guess that could lead to the emotion of hate, but not necessarily. It may be that you despise something (disapprove of it) but you aren’t a complete hater. It’s also possible that you hate something but aren’t bitter toward it.

Ron Evans clarifies in his The Artful Nuance: “To hate is to dislike intensely but needn’t imply ‘looking down on’: ‘A man may hate another man for running away with his wife without despising him.’ ”1 And Dave Dowling gives us this example in The Wrong Word Dictionary: It seems people either love or hate mayonnaise on sandwiches.”2

My error is in using despise as a fancy form of hate. For example, I would say that people either love or despise mayonnaise on sandwiches, but this usage implies that people may feel scorn toward mayonnaise . . . which seems unlikely. (I’ve never heard anyone admit to bitterness toward mayonnaise.)

What’s my WWW verdict? Despise and hate are not interchangeable. Especially when it comes to sandwiches.

What’s your verdict? Do you think despise and hate are interchangeable? Are you bitter toward sandwich condiments? Do share in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 71.
2. Dave Dowling, The Wrong Word Dictionary (Oak Park, IL: Marion Street Press, 2005), 79.

 

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Frog vs. Toad

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Are you familiar with the Frog and Toad children’s books? I read them back in the day and was reminded of them in an article by Erin Newcomb posted at Christ and Pop Culture on Monday. The best books present characters so real that readers consider them friends. Frog is the sort of guy who is friendly and easy going. Toad is more serious and pensive. Their differences do not prohibit them from being friends, however (a lesson we all need, whatever our age).

But Frog and Toad are not people; they are creatures. So I began to consider the differences between actual frogs and toads . . . which landed me on the topic for this week’s Which Word Wednesday.

Let’s dig in with the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

frog :: noun
a tailless amphibian with a short squat body, moist smooth skin, and very long hind legs for leaping

toad :: noun
a tailless amphibian with a short stout body and short legs, typically having dry warty skin that can exude poison

Both are tailless with short bodies. But frogs get the long legs and moist skin while the toads have short legs and dry skin with warts and poison.

Ron Evans gives us further insight from his The Artful Nuance: “They differ in at least four obvious respects. Frogs like water, are smooth skinned, leap, and have teeth. Toads, except when breeding, aren’t aquatic; are dry, rough skinned, and warty (though they don’t cause warts); and are toothless.”1

What’s my WWW verdict? When you come across a stout, tailless amphibian, and you aren’t sure if it’s a frog or a toad, just ask it to smile. The presence or absence of teeth will solve it.

What’s your verdict? Do you the Frog and Toad adventure stories? Were you aware that frogs have teeth but toads go gummy? Do share in the comments.

_______________
Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 104.

 

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Healthful vs. Healthy

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , , , |
[2] Comments 

A few months ago, as I was editing content for a client, I came across the word healthful. I don’t see that word very often, and I wondered how it differed from healthy, so I decided to do a check on it.

Since then, I’ve known the difference between the two, but I have a hard time training my tongue to use them properly. Perhaps a feature on Which Word Wednesday will get my tongue to cooperate with my brain? Here are the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

healthful :: adjective
having or conducive to good health

healthy :: adjective
in good health

So far we’ve learned that both words are adjectives and both describe the state of health. This doesn’t help with usage though. David Dowling helps in his The Wrong Word Dictionary: “Healthful means conducive to good health” while “healthy means possessing good health.”1

Ron Evans agrees in The Artful Nuance, adding, “What is healthy enjoys good health.”2

Based on these definitions, food would be described as healthful, not healthy, because food contributes to our health either positively or negatively. Food does not enjoy good health. (Unless you live in VeggieTale World.)

What’s my WWW verdict? People are healthy; food, exercise, and rest are healthful. Proper grammar, punctuation, and words are also healthful.

What’s your verdict? Do you use healthy to describe food, exercise, and rest? Will you be able to train your tongue to use healthful instead? Do share in the comments.

_______________
Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Dave Dowling, The Wrong Word Dictionary (Oak Park, IL: Marion Street Press, 2005), 122.
2. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 115.

 

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Prim vs. Prissy

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Selections for Which Word Wednesday typically are chosen from a language debacle or mystery that I simply must put to rest. I must be in a language slump, because this week, I couldn’t think of even one example to draw upon.

Good thing we have The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language by Ron Evans. He provides a whole book full of examples. I flipped through the pages until this entry caught my eye: PRIM/PRISSY (ADJ.). That sounded interesting to me, so here we go, fellow language lovers!

We’ll start with the definitions from The Oxford American Dictionary:

prim :: adjective
stiffly formal and respectable; feeling or showing disapproval of anything regarded as improper

prissy :: adjective
(of a person or their manner) fussily and excessively respectable

When I hear the word prim, I immediately think of proper, as in “prim and proper.” I’m not sure why I always yoke those two together. It also makes me think of someone who is British. I have no explanation for that.

As for prissy, I think of someone who would never go camping (unless it was glamping) because of the outdoorsy bathroom situation. (Interesting side note: OAD says that prissy has been around since the late 19th century, “perhaps a blend of prim and sissy.”)

I do not consider either prim or prissy to be complimentary. Evans supports this in The Artful Nuance:

A prim person is affectedly precise or proper, stiffly formal, and so fastidious in manners and morals as to displease observers.

Prissy . . . means “fussily prim” and connotes sassiness, suggesting an exaggerated sense of what is proper or precise.1

So prim people displease others with their stiff disregard for anything that doesn’t meet their standards for propriety. Prissy people are prim people who get sassy about it.

What’s my WWW verdict? If you want to insult someone, use prim or prissy to describe her. But only if it is true—it wouldn’t be proper otherwise. (In no way am I being prim or prissy about this standard.)

What’s your verdict? Do you use prim or prissy to describe people? Are those descriptors properly applied now that you know the definitions and nuances? Do share in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 163.

 

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Home vs. Hone

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , |
1 Comment 

Ignorance truly is bliss when it comes to word dilemmas. People who aren’t aware of the potential pitfalls speak freely, without fear of misuse. But I am aware (most of the time) and that awareness erodes my bliss when I can’t remember which word to use.

Recently, my bliss turned to utter internal distraction when a speaker used the phrase “home in” to describe the process of distilling information to the core elements. I couldn’t remember if the correct word was home or hone. I knew there was a difference, but I couldn’t remember what it was. That started a distracting undercurrent in my brain as I tried to figure it out. Eventually, I had to put it aside and wait for Which Word Wednesday so I could focus on the conversation at hand.

Let’s look to the Oxford American Dictionary for the definitions:

home :: verb
(of an animal) return by instinct to its territory after leaving it; (home in on) move or be aimed toward (a target or destination) with great accuracy.

hone :: verb
(usu. be honed) make sharper or more focused or efficient.

When you want to communicate a returning or an aiming process, home is the verb you want. When you want to communicate a sharpening focus, hone is correct.

Makes sense . . . but how can we remember the difference for quick and proper application? That’s typically my problem—all of it makes sense here on page; it’s the need for speed when speaking that trips me up.

It looks like home refers more to a direction of movement and focus. Think of homing pigeons, circling about their target for landing. They are homing in on their landing pad.

When sharpening your skills, you are honing them—you are focusing upon them to strengthen them.

What’s my WWW verdict? I think these words are easily confused because honing is a lost art. (Think about it: When is the last time you saw a whetstone?)

What’s your verdict? Do you use home and hone interchangeably? Have you ever worked with homing pigeons or whetstones? Cast your vote and share your thoughts in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

 

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Stalactites vs. Stalagmites

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , , , , |
[5] Comments 

During my undergraduate studies at Illinois State University, I once took a course on geology to fulfill a general education credit. The professor was extremely passionate about rocks and land formations, which was good. He also spoke like a hippie, often interjecting “dude” or “butt-load” amidst the geological terminology. That was years ago. . . . it’s strange what the mind holds onto, huh?

I was reminded of what didn’t stick from that course while making waffles at a hotel in Maryland last weekend. The waffle batter had oozed down the sides of the griddle, so when I dislodged my golden griddle cake, it had pointy fingers of baked batter protruding around the edges. I commented that it looked like stalactites or stalagmites—but I wasn’t sure which one was the proper term for upward pointing formations. Those definitions didn’t stick from my college days.

Know Your Calcium Cave Deposits

Good thing we have Which Word Wednesday to solve this language dilemma. Let’s look first to the Oxford American Dictionary for the definitions:

stalactite :: noun
A tapering structure hanging like an icicle from the roof of a cave, formed of calcium salts deposited by dripping water.

stalagmite :: noun
A mound or tapering column rising from the floor of a cave, formed of calcium salts deposited by dripping water and often uniting with a stalactite.

Although the definitions tell us the difference, the real issue is remembering our up deposits from our down deposits. We’ll turn to another source for some memory hooks.

Ron Evans tells us in The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language that stalactite is Greek for “that which drips.” This reminds us that the deposits drip from the ceiling, and since ceiling starts with c it matches the c in stalactite.Likewise, the g in stalagmite reminds us that the deposits sometimes protrude from the ground up.1

What’s my WWW verdict? Whoever named those deposits was sure wise to use c for the ceiling formation and g for the ground formation. Thanks, Dude.

What’s your verdict? Have you ever seen geological deposits in your breakfast waffles? Have you ever taken a geology course taught by a hippie? Do share in the comments.

_______________

Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 188–189.
Image: http://www.threadless.com/product/1378/Stalagmite_vs_Stalactite

 

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Which Word Wednesday: Neologism vs. Nonce Word

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

You can tell a lot about a person based on the slang they use. For example, if you toss in a supportive, “Groovy!” with any regularity we know you were alive and alert in the 1970s. Or you are a loyal Brady Bunch fan.

We must watch the slang we pick up, for it will stick to our lexicographical ribs and give us company for years to come. All this slang analysis makes for a Which Word Wednesday entry between neologism and nonce word, both used to categorize and describe new words and phrases. Here are the definitions from the Oxford American Dictionary:

neologism :: noun
a newly coined word or expression

nonce word :: noun
(of a word or expression) coined for or used on one occasion

Both words refer to words or expressions that are newly coined. But the nonce word “is one coined ‘for the nonce’—that is, made up for one occasion and unlikely to be used again.”1

This seems sort of sad, don’t you think? All that creativity tossed aside after one use. The good news is that even if the creator meant it for single use, if others pick it up and get it into regular use, it transforms from a nonce word to a neologism and it becomes a part of our regular lexicon.

A recent example of a nonce word comes from a FoodNetwork show I thoroughly enjoy, The Next FoodNetwork Star. In this week’s episode, one of the contestants created a dish consisting of lasagna wrapped in a tortilla (burrito style) and deep-fried. He called it a la-changa (combining lasagna and chimichanga). The dish wasn’t a hit, so my guess is this nonce word will not be transforming into a neologism.

What’s my WWW verdict? Be careful which neologisms you pick up. Like all habits, it takes just a few uses to turn a fancy into a habit. And some words we have trouble breaking free from.

What’s your verdict? Do you find some slang difficult to shake? What’s your favorite slang phrase? Do share in the comments.

_______________
Check out previous Which Word Wednesday verdicts here.

_______________
Sources
1. Ron Evans, The Artful Nuance: A Refined Guide to Imperfectly Understood Words in the English Language (New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2009), 148.

 

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Which Word Wednesday: Podium vs. Lectern

Posted by erinstraza under language | Tags: , , , , , , |
[5] Comments 

If you’ve ever given a speech—for work, class, church, etc.—then you’ve likely encountered the words selected for today’s Which Word Wednesday post.

So here’s my question for you: When giving a speech, do you stand behind the podium or the lectern?

These words are often used interchangeably, but careful speakers will follow the definitions. Let’s look at the Oxford American Dictionary:

Podium :: noun
a small platform on which a person may stand to be seen by an audience, as when making a speech or conducting an orchestra.

Lectern :: noun
a tall stand with a sloping top to hold a book or notes, and from which someone, typically a preacher or lecturer, can read while standing up.

These nouns describe elements of a stage area used for addressing an audience. One refers to what the speaker stands upon (the podium); the other refers to what the speaker stand behind (the lectern).

I often use podium when I mean lectern—for some reason, podium is a word that sits higher on my word stack than lectern.

To remember the difference between the two, I have associated lectern with lecture, and because lecture reminds me of my university teaching days behind the lectern (I did not teach on a podium), it makes sense in my brain. The test is whether my brain will make sense of that when I need to quickly access the word!

My verdict in this WWW? Podium and lectern describe two different aspects of a stage area where speakers stand. These words are associated, but not synonyms.

What’s your verdict? Take the poll and share your thoughts in the comments.

 

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 63 other followers