The most frequently confused words I see in bicycling forums

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Colorado Bicycler, Dec 9, 2005.

  1. In article <[email protected]>, Mike
    Kruger ([email protected]) wrote:
    > <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > >
    > > In the traffic reports, roads are not blocked, "roadways" are blocked.
    > > We don't have rain but "rainstorms", we don't ride bicycle by pushing
    > > on cranks, we use "crankarms", cars don't crash into the median but do
    > > so into "the center divide." Who comes up with this jargon?
    > >

    > Good question. I'd guess there are several factors contributing, two of
    > which are:
    >
    > 1. Consultant-ese. A consultant can't improve your accounting. They have to
    > improve your "accounting process". We don't have files anymore, we have
    > "database structures". Businesses will pay more for jargon. I used to write
    > specs. Now I write "technical requirements". I don't talk to programmers
    > anymore; I go to "Joint Application Design" meetings or "Tollgate Review
    > Processes". These meetings aren't moderated (or refereed!). They are
    > "facilitated".


    Don't get me started on this kind of thing. Since the Nut Mines were
    Borged by a BigCo a few years ago, we get more and more of this stuff,
    to the extent that I may find myself running amok with a headset spanner
    the next time someone uses the word "leverage" as a verb within earshot.

    A friend reported the use of the word "path" as a verb recently. I have
    not the words.

    --
    Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
    God was my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat
    Him.
     


  2. Peter Cole

    Peter Cole Guest

    [email protected] wrote:
    > Peter Cole writes:
    >
    >
    >> From m-w.com:

    >
    >
    >>Main Entry: hope.ful.ly
    >>Pronunciation:
    >>Function: adverb
    >>1 : in a hopeful manner
    >>2 : it is hoped : I hope : we hope

    >
    >
    >>Usage In the early 1960s the second sense of hopefully, which had
    >>been in sporadic use since around 1932, underwent a surge of popular
    >>use.


    >>The second sense of hopefully is entirely
    >>standard.

    >
    >
    > Whether the use of hopefully has been taken up by the dictionary you
    > cite or not has little bearing on its effective use.


    It's unclear what you mean by "effective". The point in my post was that
    the original complaint (of the word being misused because of confusion
    over meaning) was wrong (as was the complaint about "momentarily"). All
    this quibbling over small lapses in such an informal medium strikes me
    as fussy. This isn't rec.bike.effectivewriting.

    English is not precise or static, meaning is established through
    convention, dictionaries merely describe those. It's a common phenomenon
    for a word to acquire a new meaning, and not unknown for that meaning to
    be even an antonym, with opposing meanings in simultaneous circulation,
    relying on context to disambiguate.

    > I disagree on
    > the definition of it being an adverb.


    That would seem to be a difficult claim to support.

    > The dangling hopefully is none
    > of the above and that is why its use is inappropriate. Appending a
    > "hopefully" to the beginning or end of a sentence gives it a doubtful
    > ring and most likely not what the author intended. Because being
    > opinionated is a great faux pas in our society, "hopefully" is invoked
    > to avoid that criticism. The speaker wants to underwrite a concept
    > but is afraid to do so.


    Or, more likely, it merely implies an outcome or opinion that isn't
    certain, but likely and/or desirable. It is very much a matter of taste
    to qualify opinions -- some find qualifications to be superfluous
    because they're implicit anyway, others take their absence to confer
    (inappropriately) the status of fact to conjecture. I think (note
    explicit qualifier) that in a forum as contentious as this, qualified
    opinions may be less provocative, even if they sound weak to some ears.

    > For instance take a moment to compare: "This
    > will work, hopefully." and "I hope this will work."


    Perhaps this distinction is too subtle for my ear, I find the meanings
    to be identical (as m-w.com describes).

    > In that vein, many writers on this forum slide into the subjunctive to
    > avoid actually voicing their opinion. "If I were to believe that, I
    > would probably say it wasn't contrived.".. (aka, but I wont say that).
    >
    > As you may have noticed in this forum, when looking for a harsh
    > criticism in response to something I wrote, "opinionated" is what
    > comes out of people civil enough to not use four letter words in their
    > response.


    I think "opinionated" would be one end of a reasonable range of
    adjectives. "Blunt", "gruff" or "crusty" might be more descriptive.
    Hopefully, you won't mind my saying so.
     
  3. And the original thread post stated:

    "Just for fun."
     
  4. Buck

    Buck Guest

    [email protected] wrote:
    > On that note, a few words in English could be banned from ones
    > vocabulary because they emasculate words and concepts when they are
    > used. Worst of these is "very" which maims adverbs or adjectives it
    > is meant to enhance. There are better words if a superlative is
    > needed. When running completely out of modifiers, "very very" comes
    > out to kill all.


    Ah, but we live in a society of superlatives. What was once described
    as "neat" has now become "Awesome!" When everyday objects or events are
    described as "awesome," what do we use to describe events which truly
    inspire awe?

    The only choices for our slang-ridden society are to either subvert the
    use of another word or phrase or create new words and phrases to
    replace the old. I agree with some observers on this thread that this
    subversion is the direct result of widespread media coverage and the
    need to generate more "hype" than the competitors.

    -Buck
     
  5. Pat Lamb

    Pat Lamb Guest

    what does THIS button do? wrote:
    > sneaux. I see sneaux here alot.
    >


    I always figured that was Quebecois snow. Or maybe yellow snow...
     
  6. On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:28:45 -0500, The Wogster wrote:

    > Chris Z The Wheelman wrote:
    >> Derailler - A device used to mace a (usually) runaway train to jump it's
    >> tracks
    >>
    >> Derailleur - A french word for a device used to shift a (usually)
    >> bicycle chain from one cog/sprocket to another.
    >>
    >> - -

    > Actually derailleur is an English word, the French word is dérailleur,
    > you will notice there is a difference.


    No, derailleur is a French word typed on an English keyboard.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    __o | Some people used to claim that, if enough monkeys sat in front
    _`\(,_ | of enough typewriters and typed long enough, eventually one of
    (_)/ (_) | them would reproduce the collected works of Shakespeare. The
    internet has proven this not to be the case.
     
  7. On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 05:25:21 -0800, Colorado Bicycler wrote:

    > than and then
    >
    > ==========================
    >
    > Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
    > waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht
    > the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.
    >
    > The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm.
    > Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef,
    > but the wrod as a wlohe.


    Amazing. My spellchecker didn't like this, though.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    __o | And what if you track down these men and kill them, what if you
    _`\(,_ | killed all of us? From every corner of Europe, hundreds,
    (_)/ (_) | thousands would rise up to take our places. Even Nazis can't
    kill that fast. -- Paul Henreid (Casablanca).
     
  8. On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 10:07:17 -0600, Pat Lamb wrote:

    > what does THIS button do? wrote:
    >> sneaux. I see sneaux here alot.
    >>

    >
    > I always figured that was Quebecois snow. Or maybe yellow snow...


    "Watch out where the Huskies go, don't you eat that yellow snow!" --
    Frank Zappa

    That song's been rattling around my head since the latest storm here; I
    guess because my dog's been making plenty of yellow snow.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    __o | It is a scientifically proven fact that a mid life crisis can
    _`\(,_ | only be cured by something racy and Italian. Bianchis and
    (_)/ (_) | Colnagos are a lot cheaper than Maserattis and Ferraris. --
    Glenn Davies
     
  9. On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:21:35 +0000, jobst.brandt wrote:

    > On that note, a few words in English could be banned from ones
    > vocabulary because they emasculate words and concepts when they are
    > used. Worst of these is "very" which maims adverbs or adjectives it
    > is meant to enhance.


    My favorite is "very unique".

    But close behind this are the newscaster-speak modifiers: I have yet to
    hear "more good", but you hear "more safe", "more clear" from newscasters
    who seem to think this is correct. I long gave up any expectation that
    they would get who/whom or I/me usage anywhere near right. But these are
    people who are paid to do nothing more than speak. They really ought to
    be able to use decent grammar.


    --

    David L. Johnson

    __o | I believe that the motion picture is destined to revolutionize
    _`\(,_ | our educational system and that in a few years it will supplant
    (_)/ (_) | largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks -- Thomas
    Edison, 1922
     
  10. Leo Lichtman

    Leo Lichtman Guest

    "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]
    > On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:21:35 +0000, jobst.brandt wrote:
    >
    >> On that note, a few words in English could be banned from ones
    >> vocabulary because they emasculate words and concepts when they are
    >> used. Worst of these is "very" which maims adverbs or adjectives it
    >> is meant to enhance.

    >
    > My favorite is "very unique".
    >
    > But close behind this are the newscaster-speak modifiers: I have yet to
    > hear "more good", but you hear "more safe", "more clear" from newscasters
    > who seem to think this is correct. I long gave up any expectation that
    > they would get who/whom or I/me usage anywhere near right. But these are
    > people who are paid to do nothing more than speak. They really ought to
    > be able to use decent grammar.
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > David L. Johnson
    >
    > __o | I believe that the motion picture is destined to revolutionize
    > _`\(,_ | our educational system and that in a few years it will supplant
    > (_)/ (_) | largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks -- Thomas
    > Edison, 1922
    >
     
  11. Leo Lichtman

    Leo Lichtman Guest

    "David L. Johnson" wrote: My favorite is "very unique".
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    How about "in order to form a *more perfect* union?"
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>
    But close behind this are the newscaster-speak modifiers: I have yet to
    hear "more good", but you hear "more safe", "more clear" from newscasters
    who seem to think this is correct.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    At least they're not redundant, like "more better."
    And what about the weather casters who talk about *hotter* and *colder*
    temperatures?
     
  12. Dave Larrington wrote:

    > A friend reported the use of the word "path" as a verb recently. I have
    > not the words.


    "Verbing weirds language." -- Calvin & Hobbes

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Now is the time for all good men to come to.
    -- Walt Kelly
     
  13. David L. Johnson wrote:

    > On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 05:25:21 -0800, Colorado Bicycler wrote:
    >
    >> than and then
    >>
    >> ==========================
    >>
    >> Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
    >> waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht
    >> the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.
    >>
    >> The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm.
    >> Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef,
    >> but the wrod as a wlohe.

    >
    > Amazing.


    Also not true, I believe. I think in this example the order of the
    internal letters was in fact carefully chosen, not randomized. I seem to
    recall that Cecil Adams addressed this in a Straight Dope column at some
    point; anyone interested could try searching the archives at

    www.straightdope.com

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Now is the time for all good men to come to.
    -- Walt Kelly
     
  14. David L. Johnson writes:

    >> On that note, a few words in English could be banned from ones
    >> vocabulary because they emasculate words and concepts when they are
    >> used. Worst of these is "very" which maims adverbs or adjectives
    >> it is meant to enhance.


    > My favorite is "very unique".


    How about "Most uniquest."

    > But close behind this are the newscaster-speak modifiers: I have yet
    > to hear "more good", but you hear "more safe", "more clear" from
    > newscasters who seem to think this is correct. I long gave up any
    > expectation that they would get who/whom or I/me usage anywhere near
    > right. But these are people who are paid to do nothing more than
    > speak. They really ought to be able to use decent grammar.


    Ah yes, but lie and lay have a special problem. Along with being
    opinionated, lying is an even worse sin,so just using the word is
    therefore dangerous. In that vein, lay and laying is used where lie
    and lying should be. That "After hens lay eggs the eggs are lying
    there." seems to be too complicated a construct to use safely.
    Just lay down and take it easy...

    Just the hazard of mentioning untruth is to great to use the correct
    form.

    Jobst Brandt
     
  15. I gesus taht msut be the csae. You wulod not be tilelng us an utnrtuh
    now, wulod you?

    (Agerdarnd in roandm oderr)
     
  16. The Wogster

    The Wogster Guest

    David L. Johnson wrote:
    > On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:28:45 -0500, The Wogster wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Chris Z The Wheelman wrote:
    >>
    >>>Derailler - A device used to mace a (usually) runaway train to jump it's
    >>>tracks
    >>>
    >>>Derailleur - A french word for a device used to shift a (usually)
    >>>bicycle chain from one cog/sprocket to another.
    >>>
    >>> - -

    >>
    >>Actually derailleur is an English word, the French word is dérailleur,
    >>you will notice there is a difference.

    >
    >
    > No, derailleur is a French word typed on an English keyboard.
    >


    Except that English has adopted the accent free version of the word,
    otherwise we would call it something else. It's why English is so hard,
    it doesn't invent words, it just adopts a word from another language.
    We could call it, a gear changer, or use the German way of inventing a
    new word, gearchanger. Derailer would work, chain mangler would also
    work, but someone decided to use the French word dérailleur, and called
    it a deraileur, so that's that.

    W
     
  17. Mike Kruger

    Mike Kruger Guest

    "Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    > Don't get me started on this kind of thing. Since the Nut Mines were
    > Borged by a BigCo a few years ago, we get more and more of this stuff,
    > to the extent that I may find myself running amok with a headset spanner
    > the next time someone uses the word "leverage" as a verb within earshot.
    >

    Give me leverage and a place to steal and I can remove the world.
     
  18. Colorado Bicycler wrote:

    > I gesus taht msut be the csae. You wulod not be tilelng us an utnrtuh
    > now, wulod you?
    >
    > (Agerdarnd in roandm oderr)


    Whether or not it's true, it's certainly more likely to be able to read
    such a sentence when it contains shorter words. I don't think I would have
    figured out "agerdarnd" very quickly without the context.

    I'm fairly certain that at least the "according to Cambridge University
    research" portion of the claim is false.

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Now is the time for all good men to come to.
    -- Walt Kelly
     
  19. John Pitts

    John Pitts Guest

    Voilà - "wallah", "wahlah".

    Eg "Wallah! He pulled a rabbit out of the hat."

    Took me ages to figure out what people meant.

    --
    John <[email protected]>
    (Remove hat before emailing)
     
  20. >I'm fairly certain that at least the "according to Cambridge University
    research" portion of the claim is false.


    You msut be kniddig!

    A fhoasleod on the irnetent? Not lkeily. No way.

    Taht wulod be cunfoisng.

    Hvea a garet day!
     
Loading...
Loading...