She'll Be Funeralized: What?

This morning, yet another TV reporter sent shivers down my spine when he announced that the victim of a murder would "be funeralized." He quickly stepped on his own toe and stammered, "Sh- she'll be... A funeral will take place tomorrow."

"Oh, no," I exclaimed. "Funeralize?"

Lazy me immediately checked Dictionary.com. Okay, yes, "funeralize" is an old word--1600's--meaning to conduct a funeral. But, can it be used in the passive?

I hoped not. Why not? After all, one can be eulogized, one can be buried, interred, entombed, lowered into the ground. One is dead. The only non-passive action of a dead person is to decompose.

Okay, fine, I'll get up and check my OE:

Yup. According to my bible, the OED, to funeralize means to conduct a funeral; it also means to make sad or melancholy.

Oh, you naughty TV reporters. It's not your fault. But, now that you've landed the job, could you please do your homework? Your language skills just funeralizes the hell out of me.

Cyndi Lauper Feels Bad, and That's Correct

Donald Trump, you're wrong. Cyndi Lauper, you're right.

It's "I feel bad."

That's because "feel" is a linking, or connecting, verb. As its name indicates, a linking verb connects the subject with the adjective.

"I feel badly" means I'm very bad at feeling things. I run my fingers across the class and do a terrible job of it.

"I feel bad" means just that--I'm upset, sad, disappointed.

But, don't feel bad; lots of people get this one wrong.

Word Reference: I Recommend

I found a wonderful website--no, it's not this one--for questions and discussions regarding grammar and usage, not just in English, but in Italian, French, German, Chinese, etc. . Some of the participants have lots to teach and are happy to teach it, to correct your errors and assumptions--and just as many are just happy to learn from them or shrug their shoulders at them.

Do check it out: http://forum.wordreference.com/

Turnip Missing

Reporters, you've just got to stop announcing that people "turn up missing." It's too trendy, too lazy. Not only that, but no one seems to know where the term came from or why you keep using it. Well, well, aren't we in luck, because I have a guess.

Could it be that the term comes to us in its present disturbingly awkward form from Latinate speakers of American English who are used to the more natural (to them), "it is missing to me" or "they are missing to me"? 

"Mi manchi" (It) or "Tu me manques" (Fr): I miss you, literally, you are missing to me.

"Que te falta?" (Sp) What do you need? Literally, "What is missing to you?"

Add that to the perfectly acceptable English or Latinate "to find oneself" (in a hole or at a loss or lost) and it's an easy slide into the linguistic uglies.

But, I'm just guessing.

"Brainstorm" Deemed Non-PC

In the "you can't make this stuff up" department, I came across this item here:


UK councils: no Latin lovers
By JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press Writer Jill Lawless, Associated Press Writer – Mon Nov 3, 3:13 pm ET

LONDON – It's a bona fide scandal.

Britain's Latin and Greek aficionados are outraged at a decision by some local councils to veto the use of Latin words and phrases — including bona fide, ad lib, et cetera and e.g. — in official documents.

The councils say Latin is no longer widely understood. But classicists say axing Latin phrases is an attack on the foundations of English — the linguistic equivalent of "ethnic cleansing."
"Think of the number of words from Latin that are now part of the English language: alias, alibi, exit, terminus," said Peter Jones, a retired professor of classics at the University of Newcastle and founder of Friends of Classics. "Are they going to cut out those words?"

"The English language is a hybrid animal that has adopted any number of words and phrases from other languages which have become a part of English," he added. "To deny the hybrid nature of the English language is almost like ethnic cleansing of English."

The council in Bournemouth, a town of 170,000 on England's south coast, has a "plain language" policy that lists 19 Latin words and phrases to be avoided, and suggests replacements. The council recommends "improvised" instead of ad hoc, and "genuine" for bona fide.
Salisbury City Council in southern England also advises staff to avoid ad hoc and et cetera, as well as French phrases like "in lieu" and "fait accompli."

British local authorities have been under pressure from their umbrella body, the Local Government Association, and others to cut their use of jargon and confusing language.
The Plain English Campaign, which has been fighting official jargon for three decades, said a majority of councils had adopted some form of plain-speaking guidelines, although few appear to have gone as far as Bournemouth in eliminating Latin.

The campaign said it supported the council's policy.

"We are talking about public documents where people need to read, understand and take action that may affect their lives," spokeswoman Marie Clair said Monday. "This is information that everybody needs to know about, regardless of their level of education."

Latin and ancient Greek were once considered the cornerstones of a first-class education. But the languages are no longer widely taught in Britain. Friends of Classics says Latin is taught in only 15 percent of state schools — a modest increase from a few years ago.

But Latin's backers say thousands of common English words have Latin roots, and argue the replacement phrases can be even more difficult to understand. To some ears "existing condition" is less harmonious than "status quo," and "the other way round" less snappy than "vice versa."
No one from the Bournemouth council was willing to speak to The Associated Press on Monday, but a spokeswoman said the language guidelines have been in effect for two years without attracting notice.

Despite the policy, the town retains a Latin motto on its crest: "Pulchritudo et salubritas" — beauty and health.

Linguistic controversies are nothing new in Britain, cradle of the English language, where people have strong opinions on what constitutes proper usage.

In recent years officials have moved to avoid language that gives offense to ethnic minorities, disabled people and other groups.

Predictably, some feel the drive has gone too far. Many were bemused earlier this year when it was reported that a town council had banned the word "brainstorm" because it might offend people with epilepsy, a condition that involves periodic electrical storms inside the brain. Tunbridge Wells council advised using "thought showers" instead.

London's Harrow Council says banning Latin is a step too far.

"I would have thought banning phrases which have been part of the texture of our language for centuries is frankly the least of a town hall's problems when it comes to communicating with the public," said Paul Osborn, the council's head of communications

Heighth, Weighth, & Other Measuremenths

While correcting a student for what I have always thought to be a mispronunciation of "Height", my principal chose to correct me in front of the students. The student was saying "hith" and I told her to say "hit" (with a long I sound and no th sound at the end) while he claimed that she was correct too. I researched this quickly, consulting 3 dictionaries, and he continues to disagree. HELP! You're the guru and I'm confident you'll have the definitive answer. His pronunciation seems to be obsolete at best.

Here's the word from the master, Bryan A. Garner, Dictionary of Modern Usage:
"Height has a distinct /t/ sound at the end. To pronounce or write this word as if it were heighth is less than fully literate. . . . The mistake may occur for any of several reasons: (1) other words conveying measurement end in -th . . . (3) [it was once standard] in Southern England."

You’re right; your principal's wrong (although Garner's "less than fully literate" is a more painful pronouncement). However, the greater sin is his having corrected you in front of your students. That wasn't nithe.

The Flu or Like the Flu?

Flu symptoms include fever, cough, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, headache, muscle aches, and extreme fatigue.

Then what are “flu-like symptoms”? Well, they would include a fever, but not really; a sore throat, but not really, a headache, but not really, etc.

The day Rudy Giuliani had his jet turn around so he could check into the most local hospital with his “flu-like symptoms,” I had a migraine accompanied by symptoms of the flu. So did thousands of other people across the country. It never occurred to me to call a doctor or check in to a hospital or try to turn a plane around. I called in sick, put an icepack on my head, and waited for the pain to go away.

Okay, we all know there’s no real equality. Planes turn around for the rich, the popular, and ex-mayors of major cities who happen to be running for president; and hospitals have special entrance doors for the same people, which means that hospitals are not unlike night clubs.

I guess the difference between a flu symptom and a flu-like symptom lies in the diagnosis; that is, if the patient indeed has the flu, they’re flu symptoms, but if it turns out that the patient has a different illness, the symptoms are flu-like. That means, Giuliani didn’t have the flu. He had something far more exotic or dire or dull.

He’s not my problem, though. He would be my problem if he became President of the USA, but that’s unlikely. Giuliani has too many Napoleonic qualities; too Bushy. Oh, dear; and then there’s the wife.

Once again, I have to ask why news reporters all used the same phrase “flu-like symptoms” instead of hunting down specifics. I flipped channels; I checked the online newspapers; I listened to the radio. Every reporter used the same phrase: “flu-like symptoms” (although the NY Times used the two terms interchangeably).

Come on; we all know that “flu-like” is a euphemism for “hangover” just as “exhaustion” is a euphemistic way of saying "overdose." We need a new crop of reporters; and, since that’s not going to happen, how about a less mysterious set of euphemisms?

Close Encounters of the News Guy Kind

The other day, I heard the same term in reference to a near accident involving two planes on a runway—"close encounter." Yes, “two planes had a close encounter on the runway.” Indeed, I heard the expression at least fifty times in the space of thirty minutes on almost every news show.

And, of course, I had to wonder if the close encounter was of an extraterrestrial nature. It wasn't. So, I ran to my personal bible—the Oxford English Dictionary—to check on the term. Sure enough, a close encounter is defined as "a supposed encounter with a UFO or extraterrestrial." And a close encounter of the first, second, etc., kind involves "increasing degrees of complexity and apparent exposure of the witness to aliens."

So, what happened on the runway should have been a "close call," a "near miss" or, more accurately, a "near collision.” But, I guess the copywriters decided it was time dip into the science-fiction genre, you know, to give the copy a bit of pizzazz. So, planes that almost come into contact on the runway or in the air are now "close encounters." It wouldn't have mattered if only one newscaster had used the term, but every single one of them on every single news program—that's just too much to bear.

I do pick on the news media—especially broadcast news—because it's so proud of its vapidity. I must, however, admit that I’m almost impressed by how rapidly slanted or incorrect usage whips through the pipelines. There must be lexicon spies out there. “Ooooh, that’s cool. ‘Close encounter.’ Hey, let’s use that one, too. It’s so, well, fresh.”

Actor Wanted--Blond, Buxom, Bawdy

Suddenly, women who act for a living are calling themselves “actors,” an appellation that distresses me for some of the same reasons the word “guy” when referring to women distresses me.

Is this what that women’s movement during the 1970s was all about? So, we could give up taking men’s names in marriage, but snag them for use in other areas of our lives?

Once, a young man—obviously not too sure of himself—flew into a fit of apoplexy when I announced that “gals”—not “guys”—was now the generic term for men and women. I suppose if we decided that “actress” was now the generic term for men and women who act for a living, more than one young man would sputter and spit with rage.

Yes, I know, the term “actor” has been adopted by women who take their thespian skills seriously and want the world to look upon them as professionals worthy of their salaries. They regard the –ss suffix as demeaning because of its history. After all, it used to mean “wife of,” and so I quite understand the dilemma they face in associating themselves with such a tag. I simply don’t understand why women always have to assume a masculine label.

Indeed, in terms of stage and screen, the lexical pickings are slim. I guess “player” isn’t a good alternative, since it has been taken over by former rogues and Don Juans. “Performer” is out, since a performer is usually a singer or dancer. “Thespian” is too evocative of high-school theater clubs; “trouper” is way too reminiscent of troubadours and traveling; “role player” is too loaded with lying and psychology. How about “theatrician”? No. Sounds too much like electrician.

If we can’t come up with a more appropriate word than “actor” for women performers, how about calling everyone who acts on stage and screen an “actoresse”? (We’ll keep the –or in actor to make it easier for men to accept the transition to gender-designation freedom.) “Esse” means “nature” or “essence.” So, an actoresse—pronounced ak-tor-es-seh), is a person who is the very essence of acting.

From or For or In Bed: He's Still Indicted

Last week, in reporting the same tired story over and over and over again, television reporters on every single English-language news channel repeated the phrase “he was indicted from his hospital bed” at least a thousand times within the space of an hour.

The phrase bothered me for three reasons.

First, its very repetition was a cruel aural punishment. Do television reporters meet on a weekly basis at their teeth-polishing salons and decide on a catchphrase of the week?

Second, the person who was “indicted” from his hospital bed was in a mental institution. Why would he have been in bed?

Third, I’m not so sure one can be indicted from anywhere. After all, one is never from court.

So I went on a little etymological hunt.

When one is indicted, one is arraigned, or accused. So, if one is, in fact, lying in a hospital bed when the judge and lawyers enter the room, they will proceed to indict him in his hospital bed.

But, that sounds a little strange, because it might suggest that everyone got into bed with him for the indictment. So, to safeguard against such misinterpretation, television writers changed the active indict to a passive to be indicted: “Mr. Alleged Perpetrator was indicted in his hospital bed.”

What we never find out is what Mr. A.P. was indicted for. But, I guess there’s definite ambiguity in “Mr. Alleged Perpetrator was indicted for murder in his hospital bed.”

Did he murder someone in his hospital bed?

So some bright copywriter or copyeditor came up with the idea of using a different preposition—from—to act as a clarifier, or dis-ambiguizer. However, because we never would say, “Mr. Alleged Perpetrator was indicted for murder from court,” it doesn’t work.

It’s a lexical mess, and had the newscasters not repeated the phrase so many times on one day, I probably wouldn’t have considered the matter, well, indictable. They might have agreed on something like: “Mr. Alleged Perpetrator was in his hospital bed when prosecutors indicted him for murder.”

But, they didn’t.

I still don’t understand, though, why he was in bed in the first place. Was it the middle of the night?