Minimalist

vanderrohe
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, the "less is more" guy, whom everyone ignores.

“Less is more.”
—Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

Holistic, thematic, simplistic, methodology Are we seeing a trend here? Where once most lexicides sprang from roughly twinned sound-alike words (stagnant for static, fortuitous for fortunate), these days it’s the suffixes that bedevil us.

So add one more: minimalist, which means “of or relating to minimalism in art or music” (New Oxford American Dictionary), but is instead used thusly:

“Can the copy be more minimalist?”

“Our department is operating on a minimalist budget.”

“We only have time for minimalistic changes.”

(Minimalistic, by the way, is not in the dictionary.)

Being minimalist does not mean to edit, excise or abbreviate, nor is it the same as being minimal. Minimalism is an aesthetic movement championed by painter Frank Stella, composer John Adams and architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, whose defining statement has ironically gone unheeded by corporate hacks across America. Call them the “new minimalisticists.” In fact, this inspires me on a new way to make those minimalist copy changes:

So much depends
Upon three lousy letters
Propping up a word
Within a whitepaper

— Otto E. Mezzo

Eviscerate

EVISCERATE: “disembowel (a person or animal); figurative: deprive (something) of its essential content” — New Oxford American Dictionary

Things just keep getting worse for embattled New Mexico Secretary of State Mary Herrera… The employees—and Democratic county clerks—eviscerate her. (The New Mexico Independent, September 2, 2010)

My friend, a Scottish newspaper chief…refuses to be mesmerised by the masters of the universe and shuns their occasional entreaties to bring his long spoon and sup with them. It leaves him free occasionally to eviscerate them with a clear conscience. (The Guardian, September 12, 2010)

When I see Deseret News executives frothing at the mouth about “innovation” as they eviscerate their own staff, I want to run to the nearest bathroom to throw up. (Salt Lake Tribune, September 16, 2010)

Did I predict this or what? I grant the many figurative uses of eviscerate a pass, overdone as they may be. But see where this carelessness has taken us? What a short and rocky walk it is from eviscerating statutes to eviscerating people.

I suppose eviscerating is such a strong action, no one could mistake its figurative use (on people) for its literal one. And yet, there’s something imprecise about it. Eviscerate means to gut an animal (note the root viscera), which gives rise to its secondary meaning — to gut a document, idea, what have you. If you denigrate, disparage or disrespect a person , are you ripping out their innards? Would it be as valid to say the aforementioned Scotsman exsanguinates, decapitates, or emasculates the objects of his scorn? Each of those butchering terms has a precise meaning, as does eviscerate, and that meaning does not encompass downsizing (as in the Salt Lake Tribune example).

I’m in a good mood today, so I’ll throw this in the imprecise-but-not-wholly-wrong pile along with decimate, annihilate and my personal favorite, liquidate. But if we’re going to be eviscerating New Mexico’s Secretary of State, can we at least check her organ donor card? The budget crisis could benefit from some haruspicy.

Otto E. Mezzo

References: http://newmexicoindependent.com/62625/sos-is-mary-herreras-ship-sinking
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/12/catholicism-christianity-pope-benedict
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/50253063-82/news-deseret-halstead-journalism.html.csp

Percentile

PERCENTILE: “each of the 100 groups into which a population can be divided according to the distribution values of a particular variable…: the tenth percentile for weight.” — New Oxford American Dictionary

Earlier this year, Lexicide addressed the tendency to add unnecessary letters to a word to fluff them up a bit. …And here we go again. I have seen clients, contractors and colleagues drag out percentile when they mean percent, as in: “We aim to command 25 percentile of the market in five years.” If they’re really trying, they’ll tack on the definitive article to make it “We aim to command the 25th percentile…” Both are wrong. In fact, the second one is, in my opinion, worse. The first one you can chalk up to ignorance or carelessness. The second one shows you’ve seen the word in its correct form and have chosen to use it stupidly. Why would you want to control the bottom 25% of the market, whatever that means?

Percentile does not mean “percent.” If it did, it would be spelled p-e-r-c-e-n-t. Percentile also does not mean “percentage,” as in “We aim to increase our percentile of market share.” Hey! Why not just avoid the problem altogether and write “We aim to increase our market share.” There’s a thought. But I don’t need to tell you that. After all, we’re all in the 95th percentile for intelligence here, right?

Otto E. Mezzo

P.S.: Oh, and you know what else bugs the snot out of me? Percentage points, as in “We aim to increase our share by 20 percentage points.” What are you, Don King? Increase it by 20 percent and the board will be just as happy, and with the money you save on toner, you can buy one of these.

Redundant

REDUNDANT: “exceeding what is necessary or normal: superfluous” — Merriam-Webster Online

CNN.com | June 18, 2010: So now you’re abandoned and redundant, wondering whether it’s OK to go see the latest Pixar without a youngster in hand. Yes, it’s OK; you owe it to yourself.

Are you redundant if your children are grown? No, even if you’re the nanny. Redundant is perched on the precipice of sliding into lexicide, helped along by the British, for whom redundant is official-speak for no longer needed (read: unemployed). But that is not what redundant means. Something that is redundant is serving the same function as something else. Far from being useless, redundancies in safety precautions, risk management and data centers are very necessary. Redundancies in writing, on the other hand…

My search of CNN.com underscores how vital it is we use our words correctly and not scoff, as so many do, at shifts in meaning. Case in point — the only reason the word wasn’t more abused this past month was the prevalence of BP officials touting the redundancies they had in place. They probably thought redundancies were “useless” too, and shut them all down.

Otto E. Mezzo

References: http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/17/toy.story.3.review/index.html?iref=allsearch

Repetitious and Redundant

Impedance mismatch

IMPEDANCE MISMATCH: “In the field of electronics, Impedance matching is the practice of designing the input impedance of an electrical load or the output impedance of its corresponding signal source in order to maximize the power transfer and minimize reflections from the load.” — from Wikipedia’s entry for impedance matching

If you don’t understand this definition (and I don’t), you have no business using the phrase impendance mismatch. And yet, decrying this tragic inconsistency is fast becoming the new delta (Not that delta was all that old).

Not being a techie, I’m a little hazy on how this phrase escaped from the rarified realm of electrical engineering, but it seems to have emigrated quietly into the world of software development, notably in the term object-relational impedance mismatch. Already, this is wrong. Nowhere is impedance in play; the term should simply be object-relational mismatch. But geeks will be geeks. MBAs, not to be outdone by their jargon-spewing colleagues, are latching onto the phrase to sound more knowledgeable, and now it’s spilling over into “the real world,” as in this op-ed on toll roads:

Relative to what is levied, there is an impedance mismatch between what we pay and the services that are rendered.

What’s wrong with mismatch? How about inconsistency or disconnect? Here’s a good one — use active voice and say “What we pay in taxes doesn’t match the services we receive.”

Meh, like anyone cares what I think. The impedance in impedance mismatch adds nothing but ignorance and verbiage to your writing. However, because it adds a sort of fluffy pretentiousness, it will win and succinctness will lose. If that isn’t an impedance to good writing, I don’t know what is.

Otto E. Mezzo, suggested by Lex

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please please please don’t follow my example. The correct word for something that slows you down is impediment. Impedance refers only to resistance in an electrical circuit. So please — oh, never mind. Just shoot me now.

References: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_matching
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mismatch
http://mainlinemedianews.com/articles/2010/06/29/main_line_suburban_life/opinion/doc4c2a4dfbb29e7673502036.txt

Careless

CARELESS: “1. Taking insufficient care; negligent: a careless housekeeper; careless proofreading; 2. Marked by or resulting from lack of forethought or thoroughness: a careless mistake3. Showing a lack of consideration: a careless remark4. Unconcerned or indifferent; heedless: careless of the consequences.” — American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

Searching for stock music is agony enough. Getting the right mood, tempo, breaks and length is like lining up stars — an Olympic task if you’re not God. But describing music must be an even more daunting chore. One can’t use keywords such as “businessman,” “beach” and “yoga” like you can to describe stock photography. So writers for stock music libraries must get creative:

A bit wild, careless, spiteful and with a little bit of blues-rock feeling as well.

The supremely refreshing and relaxing sound of the stream is only accompanied by occasional distant birds, singing carelessly and taking absolutely no notice of you.

Careless, feelgood music.

Ooh! Cue vibraslap. Careless is not the same as carefree. Careless means negligent, sloppy — not something you want in music unless it’s your kid’s elementary school orchestra. Do not confuse it with happy-go-lucky or sans souci.

But wait! you say. Look at the fifth and six definitions in AHD4:

5. Unstudied or effortless: danced with careless grace; 6. Exhibiting a disposition that is free from cares; cheerful: a careless grin; a careless wave of the hand.

Aha! Lexicide loses again! Well, I give you that definition 6 seems to cross over into carefree territory. But I did a news search and found only correct uses across the board. So if you want to tell your clients you take a careless approach to account management, go ahead and be careless. Just don’t come running to me when you misplace those purchase orders.

— Otto E. Mezzo

Reference withheld to protect my stock music supplier from ridicule.

In lieu

IN LIEU: “instead” — New Oxford American Dictionary

You can’t get any more succinct than that. I would have never thought in lieu, as “I accepted store credit in lieu of a refund,” would be in question. Then, on May 5, I receive this email:

And in lieu of today’s date, the baby’s name will be Juanita Margarita.

You see, a colleague had just given birth and another colleague thought, it being Cinco de Mayo, the baby should have a Spanish name and — oh, screw it. The point is: WHERE DID HE LEARN THAT IN LIEU OF MEANS IN HONOR OF?

The best explanation I can think of goes back to days in lieu or lieu days — work days that one takes off in lieu of a holiday or in lieu of compensation for overtime. So maybe because in lieu days are in recognition of hard work —no, you know, this is just out of control. Once FYI starts meaning “just in case,” anything goes! Black is white! Right is wrong! The expedient brown fox leveraged an overt trajectory per the dog! Free! I’m free of true meaning! Woo hoo! Ni! Ni!

Otto will be on sabbatical until further notice. Cards and prayers are appreciated. Thanks. — ed.

Disinterested

DISINTERESTED: “free of bias and self-interest; impartial” — The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

For our ultimate Glitterary Week article, I have dragged out disinterested, which some of you expressed an interest in. I thought it was well-known that disinterested means “impartial,” and that uninterested referred to someone who was blasé. Obviously that is not the case. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present Exhibits A and B:

“The Lakers have either been disinterested or dysfunctional in the final six weeks of the season.” — “NBA Western Conference playoff preview,” The Washington Post, April 17, 2010

“The period ended with the disinterested Devils being booed loudly as they were headed to their third straight opening-round elimination.” — “Flyers beat Devils, 3-0, to take series,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 23, 2010

Lest you chalk those examples up to the Neanderthal language skills of sportswriters, please refer to Exhibit C:

“Both the cinematographer and Nolan are disinterested in digital cinematography and very much prefer to shoot on film. That’s the root of their disinterest in 3D… The appeal of IMAX and the disinterest in 3D both come from that love of shooting on film.” — “Dark Knight Cinematographer Wally Pfister Talks Batman 3 and 3D,” /Film, April 21, 2010

Egad. That’s three misuses of the same word in two paragraphs. What do you expect? It’s a blog.

Now, I would go on and on about how judges are disinterested while teenagers are uninterested, but I won’t, for two reasons: 1) would it matter? 2) even if it mattered, it wouldn’t matter. Misusers would just argue that being unenthusiastic is the same as having no stake (which is not true, anyhow. A defense lawyer might be uninterested in a case, but he is far from disinterested); and 3) the meaning has already begun its shift to legitimacy. AHD4 lists as its second definition “2. a. not interested; indifferent; b. having lost interest” Merriam-Webster Online lists “not interested” as its first definition. ADH4 and NOAD refuse to acknowledge the shift, with 88% of ADH4‘s Usage Panel disdaining it. But Random House and Merriam-Webster claim the “new” definition is not new at all, with M-W citing a letter Jack London wrote in 1914.

As for me, I’ll leave it up to you. After all, I’m disinterested in what you decide.

Otto E. Mezzo

References: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/16/AR2010041604535.html?hpid=topnews
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/sports/20100423_Flyers_beat_Devils__3-0__to_take_series.html
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/04/21/dark-knight-cinematographer-wally-pfister-talks-batman-3-and-3d/
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disinterested
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disinterested (Contains usage note from ADH4)
New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd edition (2005)

Schema

SCHEMA: “1. a diagrammatic representation; an outline or model; 2. (Psychology) a pattern imposed on complex reality or experience to assist in explaining it, mediate perception, or guide response.” — The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

Glitterary Week is proving to be a challenge. It seems the Lexicide fanbase is quite persnickety, railing, for example, against the interchanging of Use/Usage/Utilize. I should have expected this, as Lexicide.com is no doubt an exercise in futility, preaching only to the caring, literate choir.

A schema is a cognitive framework that assists us in processing information. Think of a schema as your browser cache — it allows you to interpret data faster. A scheme is a plan or system of plans. Chances are, unless you’re a psychologist or philosopher, you will never have occasion to use schema (or its plurals schemas and schemata) correctly. That doesn’t stop hoity-toity lexicidal maniacs from offering marketing schemas or business development schemas. I’ve even had clients refer to color schemas. Come on! Do you want me to start talking about process control documentas or business modelos? No, don’t answer that.

Otto E. Mezzo

Reference: Wikipedia entry on schema according to Kant

Use/Usage/Utilize

USAGE: “1. the action of using something or the fact of being used; 2. the way in which a word or phrase is normally and correctly used; 3. habitual or customary practice” — New Oxford American Dictionary

UTILIZE: “make practical and effective use of: vitamin C helps your body utilize the iron present in your diet.” — Ibid.

Of all the online submissions to Lexicide, usage and utilize seemed to have raised the most hackles. We have avoided addressing these usages because the subtleties are beyond the understanding of most corporate zombies. If that strikes you as a tad supercilious, I remind you that this is the crowd who thinks FYI stands for “just in case.”

But the fans have spoken, so here goes… Usage, according to most sources, refers to standard practices (language usage) or ongoing deployment (water usage). If you speak of singular events (the speech made good use of analogies) or deployments with a beginning and an end (bandwidth use in April was double what it was in March), then use use.

Likewise, utilize is not an all-purpose synonym for use in the verb form. It means “to make practical and effective use of,” as in “we utilize our turnkey technology platform to increase efficiency.” See? I used it in a weasely corporate-speak sentence, but I used it correctly. It is not correct to say an employee should utilize a procedure or best practice, or that a client should utilize his browser to access a website. Even worse to claim your company utilizes effectively or best utilizes something — both are redundant.

When in doubt — and doubt you should — use use. Use use. I’ll say it again: use use. The best thing about simple words is they are usually correct. In all the examples above, use works, even if usage or utilize is also on the money. But use is too direct, too active and too understandable, so it’s out. Which explains why sysadmins now have “clients” instead of “users.”

Otto E. Mezzo

Vaguely related to usage is signage, which refers not to signs but to a system of signs — a store has eye-catching signage, except for some signs that need to be updated. I remember when the suffix age threatened the business world until people came to their senses and realized shrinkage and tonnage sounded okay, but costage and profitage were not going to fly. Still, my colleague received an email once that asked her to reduce her lineage. The department puzzled over why the client was concerned with her ancestry until we realized with horror what the client was requesting — to reduce the number of lines of copy in an ad.

For fun: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2058/whats-the-origin-of-the-suffix-age