Editor's Corner

Good morning, everyone.

You’ve heard of euphemisms—tactful words that are used as substitutes for words that could be considered harsh, offensive, or unpleasant (for example, let go instead of fire, correctional facility instead of prison, pass away instead of die). The word euphemism comes from the Greek eu- meaning good or well and pheme meaning speech, voice, or utterance. Euphemisms allow us to speak with sensitivity, but they are also used as doublespeak; we hear many euphemisms from politicians when they want to make something appear less offensive or more palatable.

Today, however, I really want to discuss euphemism’s antonym: dysphemism.

A dysphemism is an offensive or disparaging word or phrase that substitutes for a typically inoffensive word or phrase (for example, quack for doctor, egghead for genius, old man for father or husband, snail mail for postal mail—of course there are many worse dysphemisms, but let’s keep it clean). The word dysphemism comes from the Greek dys- meaning miss or none and pheme (defined above). Sometimes we use dysphemisms to tease or belittle others, but we all know where that kind of behavior leads (Mom was right; it usually ends in tears).

Growing up with two older brothers, I learned about dysphemisms double quick. My younger sister had to deal with both of my brothers and me. I’m a kinder person now, and I feel guilty about all the teasing she had to put up with. That egghead learned to give as good as she got, though.

I’m kidding! She’s not an egghead at all.

I’m kidding again, she really is very smart. See what I did there? I used a dysphemism to both compliment and insult her at the same time. You can thank my brothers for my cruel ingenuity.

Donna Bradley Burcher | Senior Technical Editor | Symitar®

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.278.0432 | Extension: 765432

Symitar Technical Publications Writing and Editing Requests

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

Hello! Today’s tiny tidbit is from But Can I Start a Sentence with “But”? Advice from the Chicago Manual of Style Q&A. Like the signs below (from our May contest), this Q&A made me laugh.

Question: Is there an acceptable way to form the possessive of words such as Macy’s and Sotheby’s? Sometimes rewording to avoid the possessive results in less felicitous writing.

Answer: Less felicitous than Sotheby’s’s? I don’t think so.

And here are some more photos from our May contest:

From Amber Dolan:

And from Jamie Roller:

Happy Friday!

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

I recently saw an advertisement for an air conditioning company that said Beat the dog days of summer, which made me wonder how the phrase dog days originated.

Merriam-Webster defines dog days as:

1. the period between early July and early September when the hot sultry weather of summer usually occurs in the northern hemisphere

2. a period of stagnation or inactivity

Merriam-Webster also gives this explanation about the origin of this phrase:

The brightest star in the sky is Sirius, also known as the Dog Star. Sirius was given this name by the ancients because it was considered the hound of the hunter Orion, whose constellation was nearby. The Dog Star was regarded by the ancient Greeks as the bringer of scorching heat, because its early-morning rising coincided with the hottest summer days of July and August. The Greek writer Plutarch called this time hmerai kynades, literally, dog daysthe days of the Dog Starand by way of Latin this phrase was translated into English as dog days.

This is how my dog feels about summer:

Jackie Solano | Technical Editor | Symitar

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.542.6711 | Extension: 766711

Symitar Documentation Services

Last week, my husband and I drove up to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to see the Guillermo del Toro museum exhibition At Home with Monsters. It was an amazing collection of paintings, sculptures, skeletons, curios, and film clips from this movie directors home, Bleak House. Anyway, as I was reading one of the descriptions of the collection, I came across the word multifarious, which Id never seen before. I am familiar with nefarious as an adjective, but this made me curious enough to look into these words a little more. Heres what I found in Merriam-Webster.

nefarious (adjective)

: heinously or impiously wicked : detestable, iniquitous

<nefarious schemes>
<nefarious practice>

<race prejudice is most nefarious on its politer levels H. E. Clurman>

Latin nefarius, from nefas crime, wrong, from ne- not + fas right, divine law; akin to Latin fari to speak

multifarious (adjective)

1: having multiplicity: having great diversity or variety: of various kinds

<the multifarious activities of a farm Kenneth Roberts>
<multifarious noise of a great city A. L. Kroeber>

2 of a pleading in law: improperly uniting distinct and independent matters and thereby confounding them whether against one or several defendants

Latin multifarius, from multifariam on many sides, in many places, from multi- + -fariam

bifarious (adjective)

archaic

: twofold, ambiguous <some strange, mysterious verity in old bifarious prophesy Ned Ward>

Latin bifarius, from bifariam in two ways, from bi- 1bi- + -fariam (akin to Sanskrit root dh in dvidh in two ways, dadhti he places, sets)

Photo from LACMA exhibit, by Ray Pennisi

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

Good morning, my friends. Today I have an interesting couple of words for you from Words of a Feather: A Humorous Puzzlement of Etymological Pairs, by Murray Suid. Our language adventure today is all about maneuver and manure. The faint of heart need not continue.

Often, a single root produces words that pull us in very different directions. Take the pair that title this entry.

Maneuver comes from the Old French maneuvre, “manual labor,” which goes back to the Latin manus, “hand.” Manual labor usually involves moving something, and by the eighteenth century maneuver had acquired the meaning of moving military forces. Around the same time, it also came to mean “shrewd operations” in other arenas, such as business and politics.

Manure, on the other hand [KC – I hate it when that happens!], suggests something down and dirty. Also tracing back to manus, manure early on meant using hands to enrich the land with dung. Eventually, the word became a synonym for dung itself.

In those old days, reviving the soil was a noble task. Indeed, until two hundred years ago, the verb manure was sometimes used in the sense of develop—so that you might talk about “manuring one’s mind.” Even into the twentieth century, E.B. White could comment favorably on “the smell of manure and the glory of everything.”

But eventually, as the masses moved from farms to cities, they lost their appreciation of dung, so that today if you told me to “manure my writing skills,” I might reply that your suggestion stinks.

And a very timely photo submission…

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

Hello, kind readers. We have talked about today’s subject before, but I recently found some shiny new examples, so here we go again, talking about redundancies.

When we write for business purposes, we want to be as concise and precise as possible. That means that we should be aware of unnecessary words and phrases (redundancies). We need to get rid of the excess and get to the point!

I found the following examples of redundancies on the Quick and Dirty Tips website. The article was a bit long, so I’ve omitted some of the examples and I’ve truncated what’s left to give you only the crux. It’s still a little long, but it’s worth the time.

Earlier and Later

Examples: “later this week,” “earlier this year”

Consider this sentence: “I’ll get back to you later this week.” Well, it has to be later this week; it’s in the future. It’s sufficient, when discussing an upcoming event, to say, “I’ll get back to you this week.”

The same goes for this sentence, dealing with a past event: “She went to Marrakesh earlier this year.”

An exception would be when striking a contrast between two events and the relative chronology is important. Here’s an example: “The senator said in June that he supported the railroad project. Earlier this year, he opposed the project.”

Future Plans

Example: “Let me know what your future plans are.”

If you’re talking about plans that one has now, they are almost invariably plans for the future. You might modify the word “plans” with the words “immediate” or “long-term” to clarify a timeframe, of course.

If, by chance, you had some plans in the past that didn’t work out, you could toss a “previous” in there, as in, “My previous plans were to become an aerialist, but then I got that inner-ear infection…”

Past History

Examples: “past history” and “past experience”

We can find a comparable situation [similar to “future plans”] with “past history” and “past experience.”

When taken in the opposite direction, time-wise, a modifier would be helpful: “We here at Granite Airlines hope your future experience with us will be far more enjoyable. And we do hope that nasty stain comes out of your suit.” Similarly, one need not prepare ahead of time. To prepare is sufficient.

Please RSVP

Example: “Please R.S.V.P.”

R.S.V.P. stands, of course, for répondez s’il vous plaît and that means “respond, please.” So, “please R.S.V.P.” would mean “please respond, please.” If you’re begging, that’s fine; but really, it’s better to preserve your dignity.

Whether or Not

Example: “I can’t decide whether or not to bring my umbrella.”

Lose the “or not” in that instance, and you’re fine. Just don’t lose your umbrella.

The Reason Is Because

Example: “The reason you love grammar is because you love rules.”

The words “reason” and “because” both represent the same idea. The sentence would be just as clear if you leave either of them out. It could read, “The reason you love grammar is that you love rules,” or “You love grammar because you love rules.”

You Can Say That Again

Let’s close with one a familiar term: “reiterate.” “Let me reiterate,” one might say, usually for emphasis. According to many dictionaries, to iterate is to say or do something again or repeatedly. So, “reiterate” would mean to re-repeat your words or actions.

“Reiterate,” of course, has become the more common term. The savvy writer, though, knows that “iterate” works just as well and that knowledge can be useful.

Donna Bradley Burcher | Senior Technical Editor | Symitar®

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.278.0432 | Extension: 765432

Symitar Technical Publications Writing and Editing Requests

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

Today, I have another pair of words for you from Words of a Feather: A Humorous Puzzlement of Etymological Pairs, by Murray Suid. Our comparison today is between the words infant and infantry. Enjoy!

An infant—defined figuratively as “a babe in arms”—doesn’t walk, whereas a member of the infantry is a foot soldier. Thus, at first glance, it seems that infant and infantry have nothing in common. But, etymologically and semantically, they are closely linked. A quotation by Frederick the Great gives a clue about the relationship. He wrote, “If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks.” Frederick’s words suggest that the link between infant and infantry may have to do with cognitive development.

Infant, in fact, comes from a Latin compound infantem, which has the same meaning as our “infant.” The first syllable in- means “not,” as in inept, ineffective, and insincere. But the second syllable has nothing to do with walking. Rather, fantem comes from the Latin verb fari, “to speak.” Thus, an infant is a child who doesn’t speak.

And infantrymen? Historically, they were the least experienced and most uneducated soldiers. Like children, they were to be seen but not heard. They were to follow orders, not dispute them. As Lord Tennyson wrote:

Theirs not to reason why,

Theirs but to do and die.

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

619-542-6773 | Ext: 766773

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

It’s been a while since I’ve shared an excerpt from Words of a Feather: A Humorous Puzzlement of Etymological Pairs, by Murray Suid. Today seems like a great day to return to this book on my desk and tell you what Mr. Suid has to say about horoscopes and skeptics.

Horoscope & Skeptic

Skeptics tend not to believe in the possibility of gaining predictive information by studying the horoscope. But here’s something they should believe: horoscope and skeptic are words of a feather. And this is their lucky day to learn all about it.

Horoscope comes from the Middle French horoscope, which traces back to the Latin horoscopus, which in turn was borrowed from the Greek compound horoskopos, which combined hora, “hour,” plus skopos, “watching.” In the context of astrology, this refers to watching the hour of one’s birth. According to astrologers, knowing the positions of the celestial bodies at the birth hour is critical for correctly interpreting the horoscope. At this point, our skeptic readers may be curious to know: “What’s the connection between this mumbo-jumbo and us?” Here’s the answer: Skeptic, originally used to name a member of a philosophical school existing more than two millennia ago, comes from the Greek skeptesthai, “to look,” which traces back to skopos, which we just learned is the source of the second half of horoscope. Horoscopists fix their attention on the pattern of the stars, while skeptics use their perceptive skills to look at everything. Why do some people believe in astrology while others laugh at it? It could be a matter of when you’re born…or not.

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

619-542-6773 | Ext: 766773

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

Dear Editrix,

In the US, we say “Joe is in the hospital”. In the UK, they say “Joe is in hospital.”

What’s the deal?

Thanks!

Mark

Dear Mark,

I found this article written by Robert Charles Lee, a Brit who “works in American English.” Here is his response to your question (written in British English, thus the different spelling of hospitalization).

Sincerely,

Editrix

Situation with British English

In some ways, British English is more subtle than American English, considering the longer history of the ‘overall’ English of the British Isles. The in hospital vs. in the hospital is an example of such a subtlety.

As far as British English goes, there is clear distinction between the two. The general rule is that:

1. absent the definite/indefinite article, it describes or implies a wider act or a more commonly occurring event, and

2. present the article, it describes a more specific, often physical, act.

"He went to hospital" explains that he went there for the purpose that the place was designed for. In other words, it describes the wider act or sense of admission, hospitalisation and treatment.

By contrast, "he went to the hospital" explains that he went to visit a particular hospital. The sense or implication is to visit (say) a friend hospitalised there. It describes the act of physically visiting the place, not for the purpose of that building.

Likewise, "he just got out of hospital" implies he’s well enough to be discharged recently, whereas "he just got out of the hospital" is just having physically departed (fled, escaped) the confines of an actual hospital facility.

Similarly, "I went to school" talks about attending classes in an educational establishment, whereas "I went to the school" is just visiting the physical establishment.

Situation with American English

The truth is, American English does roughly the same thing with some nouns, so this isn’t special or exclusive to British English.

British just do it with a few more nouns than American do. Americans do say:

· go to school

· go to college

· go to work

· go on vacation (rather than ‘go on a holiday’)

· soldiers go to war, and reporters go to the war zone

Even in American English [KC – In italic, below], the definite and indefinite articles (the, a, an) before the noun will be omitted if the meaning is (as in British English) of a state or condition and not of a specific place:

· going to jail (going to be locked up)

· going to the jail (visiting a particular jail in the next town, etc.)

· in love

· in hospital

· at university

· under fire

And a little Spanish humor from Jackie Solano:

***For those of you unfamiliar with Spanish, soy means “I am.”

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

Good morning, friends and neighbors.

In technical and business writing, abbreviations are used generously—too generously. Some years ago, when I was a new Symitar employee, I was overwhelmed by all the abbreviations. I created a spreadsheet and referred to it often.

The problem with abbreviations is that not everyone knows what they stand for. That’s why, in most cases, your friendly editors ask that you spell out the word or words on the first usage, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses, and then you can use the abbreviation alone afterward.

Of course, there are exceptions. There are always exceptions!

· Titles of senior corporate executives (CEO, CFO, COO, etc.) are typically abbreviated. You do not need to spell them out.

· CD and DVD are abbreviations that do not need to be spelled out. In fact, people may not even know what the letters stand for, so it might be confusing if you do spell them out. The same is true for URL. Some other well-known abbreviations that you do not need to spell out are IRS, NASA, vs., and etc. And the list goes on.

· OK is preferred over okay because OK is likely a derivation of oll korrect, a humorous way to indicate that something is all correct (traced back to 1838).

Just ask yourself, if the abbreviation you’re using will be clear to everyone. Make sure it’s not an abbreviation that will flummox newbies or people outside your department, company, or profession. If you’re not sure, spell it out the first time you use it.

If you’d like to read more about abbreviations, click here. If you’d like to see a bowl of puppies, click here.

Donna Bradley Burcher | Senior Technical Editor | Symitar®

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.278.0432 | Extension: 765432

Symitar Technical Publications Writing and Editing Requests

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.