Words on the Web: alt.usage.english FAQ

1 June 2002

If you’re not familiar with Usenet, you’re missing out on a rich part of the Internet experience. Usenet (short for “Unix User Network") is a hierarchy of discussion groups on all manner of subjects. It got its start back in 1979 when the Internet was still known as Arpanet. The discussion groups range from 3dfx.game.discussion to z-netz.wissenschaft.technik. Every subject under the sun has its own discussion group. The one we’re interested in is alt.usage.english (or AUE).

As you might guess, AUE is all about English grammar and style. The group discusses the English language (and also occasionally other languages); how particular words, phrases, and syntactic forms are used; their origin; where in the English-speaking world they’re prevalent; and how they should be used.

Recent topics of discussion include comma splices, why wormer and dewormer mean the same thing, and is there a Russian bias in OED etymologies?

The group is quite an active one, and keeping up with all the daily messages can be time-consuming. But the FAQ is available to all, not just those who read the group.

Most of these discussion groups have lists of frequently asked questions (FAQ) for newcomers to the particular group. Supposedly these FAQs exist so that regular contributors don’t have to answer the same questions over and over again. But often these FAQs are more than lists of questions and answers. They often contain detailed information on all aspects of the group’s topic, as well as conventions and idiosyncrasies of the group. For example by reading the FAQ on alt.folklore.urban, you will find out that posting smileys in your messages to that group is frowned upon.

The AUE FAQ is no exception. Compiled by Mark Israel, it was last updated in 1997 (an eternity in Internet time, but given the subject it’s hardly outdated; one notable exception is the discussion about when the new millennium starts, which is vestigial at this point).

The FAQ includes:
• Guidelines for posting
• Recommended dictionaries & books
• Artificial dialects
• Pronunciation
• Usage disputes
• Punctuation
• Foreigners’ FAQs
• Word origins
• Phrase origins
• Words frequently sought, and
• Spelling

Even if you never visit the AUE newsgroup or post a question or reply, the FAQ is a valuable on-line resource. There’s not much that you won’t find in other references, but it’s a one-stop shop for English language info.

It does have some specific Internet-oriented advice. A section of the FAQ discusses how to represent pronunciation in ASCII text. Also the section on specific problems that non-native speakers frequently encounter is useful and not found in many style or grammar manuals. And buried throughout are puzzles, wordplay, and fun forms that make the FAQ suitable for leisure reading (if you’re into this stuff that is).
So, if you want to find out how to pronounce ghoti, how many words end in –gry, the origin of golf, or whether it’s “company is” or “company are,” the AUE faq is only a mouse click away.

Book Review: Language and the Internet

1 June 2002

David Crystal, author of numerous books on language and linguistics, has written the first book-length study on the effects the Internet is having on language. In Language And The Internet Crystal provides an overview of the different forms of Internet communication and how language is used and modified in and by those media. Crystal’s conclusions are broad and tentative, as one might expect of such a large topic and such a new technology, but they are well-reasoned, supported by data, and often quite surprising, bucking the conventional wisdom.

Pundits have often opined that the Internet will be the death of grammar and spelling, that it will destroy thoughtful writing by encouraging sloppiness that is covered by the band-aid of a smiley or emoticon. Or that it will kill other languages, leaving only English as the sole survivor. Crystal carefully takes each of these conclusions apart, showing how people are adapting the tool of language to fit the new technology and enriching language and communication as a result.

Crystal divides the Internet into five broad media, e-mail, asynchronous chat-groups, synchronous chat-groups, virtual worlds, and the web. In each he finds that people have adapted language to meet the particular requirements and uses of that particular medium. He calls this new, adapted form of language netspeak.

Netspeak occupies a middle ground between speech and writing, sharing characteristics of both. Internet communication is not done face-to-face, as speech is usually conducted, hence it lacks the facial and body clues that accompany speech. But it also lacks the intonations and aural clues of speech, which makes it different from telephone conversations, which also lack visual clues. Some forms of netspeak are spontaneous like speech and not revisable, as writing is.

To give an example of how netspeak creates new conventions to overcome these particular difficulties, smileys and emoticons were invented to overcome these difficulties. They take the place of visual and aural clues. They are not required in formal writing because the time available to carefully chose one’s words and to revise and edit. This time is lacking in the immediacy of netspeak and some tool is required to replace those visual and aural clues, hence emoticons.

Scattered throughout the book are wonderful examples of the new terms and coinages that make up the new vocabulary of the Internet. From RUOK, to flames, to e-cash, he gives us a snapshot of a wild and woolly field of online language growth and change.

Crystal’s book is not the last word on the subject; rather it’s the first. We’re at the beginning of what will likely be the greatest revolution in the use of language since the invention of the printing press, and this book is the first to take a systematic and measured view of the changes so far.

Hardcover; 282 pages; Cambridge Univ. Press; ISBN: 0521802121; 1 October 2001; $20.00

Word of the Month: Watergate

1 June 2002

Thirty years ago this month, five men were arrested breaking into the Democratic National Headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington, DC. Among those arrested was James W. McCord, Jr., the security director for Republican President Richard Nixon’s Committee to Re-elect the President. The investigation into the break-in would expose ever larger circles of corruption and abuses of power in the Nixon White House and would eventually, in August 1974, lead to the resignation of the president.

Watergate, as the collection of scandals came to be known, was the biggest American political scandal of the 20th century. It left an indelible mark on US history, politics, and on the American political lexicon. So, in honor of this 30th anniversary, our word of the month is:

Watergaten., a hotel-apartment-office complex along the Potomac River in Washington, DC. In 1972, the Democratic National Committee had its offices in the complex and on 17 June of that year burglars working for the White House broke into the offices to plant listening devices. Watergate became the name of the associated scandal. Subsequent Washington scandals were commonly dubbed with the -gate suffix, such as KoreagateIrangate, and Monicagate.

Other terms created or popularized by the scandal are:

Big Enchiladan., the person in charge, the most important person or thing. Coined by Nixon’s Domestic Policy Advisor John Erlichman in March 1973 in reference to former Attorney General John Mitchell. The term follows in the tradition of big cheesebig fish, and bigwig. Erlichman claims he used enchilada because of his fondness for Mexican food.

Bugn. and v., electronic eavesdropping device. From underworld slang going back to 1919, because a small microphone resembles an insect. Common in criminal argot and in crime and spy fiction before Watergate, the word gained widespread currency as a result of the press coverage of the break-in.

Cover-upn. and v., concealment of wrongdoing, obstruction of justice. The term actually dates to the 1930s underworld slang, but was popularized by Watergate.

CREEPn., unofficial acronym for the Committee to RE-Elect the President; the official abbreviation was CRP. Surprisingly a Democrat didn’t coin this derogatory acronym, but rather Republican National Committee Chairman Bob Dole did. He thought his organization was being given short shrift in the campaign.

Deep Throatn., an informant, particularly the one that aided reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post in uncovering the Watergate scandal. That pair’s editor, Howard Simon, coined the name. The name is a play on the term deep background, newspaper jargon for a source who is only used to confirm what others have already told a reporter and who is never quoted—not even anonymously, and the title of the famous pornographic movie which was released in 1972 and quite popular at the time. The identity of Deep Throat has never been revealed.

Enemies Listn., a list of political opponents who are to be harassed and otherwise interfered with. The name was coined by White House Counsel John Dean who ordered the creation of the original list. Now used to refer to any such list of names.

Executive Privilegen., the right of the US Executive Branch to withhold certain types of information from Congress and the public. While the concept goes back to the founding of the republic, the phrase is relatively new. It was first used in the 1950s and gained widespread use during Watergate.

Expletive Deletedc.phr., phrase used in the publicly released transcripts of the Nixon White House tapes to mark where the president and his aides used profanity. The transcripts are filled with the phrase.

Follow the Moneyc.phr., coined by Deep Throat as advice to Woodward and Bernstein. It refers to the investigative technique of tracing monetary payments to find who is involved a secretive venture.

Hardballn. and adj., rough, aggressive competition. From the imagery of baseball v. softball, but the term isn’t originally from sports lingo. It was first used in 1944 in reference to the Chicago newspaper business. The term was widely used by the press to categorize the tactics of Nixon’s 1972 campaign and Watergate.

Plumbern., one who plugs leaks of information to the press, the term was coined in 1970 by David Young, who along with G. Gordon Liddy, had the task of investigating White House leaks to the press. The name was later applied to the Special Investigations Unit, led by Liddy and Howard Hunt, which in 1971 took on this task of plugging leaks through illegal methods. Liddy’s and Hunt’s plumbers were most infamous for their failed break-in of the office of a psychiatrist in an attempt to uncover derogatory information about Daniel Ellsberg, a patient who had leaked The Pentagon Papers, an exposé about the prosecution of the Vietnam War, to the press.

Ratfuckv., dirty tricks used to discredit an opponent during a campaign. Donald Segretti and Dwight Chapin coined the term during their college years in the late 1960s. They used it to refer to dirty tricks used in campus politics in Southern California. They brought the term with them to the campaign and the White House when they went to work for Nixon.

Saturday Night Massacren., the firing of three top Justice Department officials on 20 October 1973. On that Saturday night, White House Chief of Staff Alexander Haig ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. Richardson refused and resigned. Haig then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus also refused and resigned. Haig next called on Solicitor General Robert Bork, who finally fired Cox. Bork went on to contribute another word to the American political lexicon. Borkv., to attack and defame someone in the media. The verb is from the successful Democratic effort to stop Bork’s nomination to the US Supreme Court in 1987. The Democratic borking of Bork was, in part, revenge for his role in the Saturday Night Massacre.

Smoking Gunn., incontrovertible evidence of guilt. Coined by Republican congressman Barber Conable during the Watergate investigation. The original smoking gun was a 23 June 1973 tape of a conversation between Richard Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, where Nixon gave explicit instructions to have the CIA interfere with an FBI investigation of Watergate. The reference is to the imagery of finding a murderer still holding the smoking murder weapon.

Twisting in the Windc.phr., left exposed, abandoned. Another coinage of John Erlichman’s, he used the phrase “twisting slowly, slowly in the wind” in reference to the failed nomination of Acting FBI Director Pat Gray to the post full time. The phrase evokes the imagery of a corpse dangling from the gallows. Many other writers used the imagery before Watergate, but Erlichman supplied the exact wording for the catch phrase.

Lloyd's List, "She" No More

1 May 2002

Some things never change and some things just seem like they never do. One of those things was using the feminine pronoun when referring to a ship.

But Lloyd’s List, the daily newspaper of the shipping industry, announced on 22 March that it is abandoning the practice. From now on the publication will refer to ships as it.

Lloyd’s List tried to make the change four years ago, but reversed itself in the face of the overwhelming ire of naval traditionalists.

Ships have been referred to as she in English since at least 1375, and Lloyd’s List has been doing it since its founding in 1734.

But traditionalists need not abandon all hope. The Royal Navy still plans to call its ships she.

Prescriptivist's Corner: Gender-Neutral Personal Pronouns

1 May 2002

English is replete with sexually general words, such as anyone, everyone, person, and oneself. But it has no sexually general personal pronouns. There is it, but that pronoun is generally considered unacceptable to use with people.

The traditional answer to this situation was to use the masculine hehimhis in situations calling for sexual ambiguity. Many see this as sexist—and in some cases as silly, as a famous 1984 example from the New York State Assembly: “everyone will be able to decide for himself whether or not to have an abortion.”

So what to do about this conundrum?

The first choice is to recast the sentence to avoid use of a personal pronoun. Instead of saying “pass the ball to him,” say, “pass the ball to the point guard.” This doesn’t always work, however. Often trying to avoid use of personal pronoun becomes too complex and awkward.

When you can’t recast the sentence, the standard response has been to use he or she/him or her/his or hers, as in “throw the ball to him or her.” Unfortunately, this is also an awkward construction. This awkwardness can be reduced by using he or she intermittently, just often enough to make clear that the reference can be to either sex. In between, use the traditional masculine pronoun.

Another solution, common in American academic writing, is to simply alternate between he and she. Use he in one paragraph and she in the next—skipping strict alternation to maintain sense; in other words if you use she to refer to the point guard in one paragraph, continue to use she whenever referring to that particular individual.

A final solution that is gaining currency, over the objection of hardcore grammarians, is to use the plural they as a gender-neutral, singular, personal pronoun.

Use of the plural they and its related forms to refer to singular subjects of indefinite pronouns is an old and respected practice. Writers have noted the problem caused by the lack of gender-neutral third person pronoun for nearly a thousand years—it’s not just feminists who have complained.

Chaucer used the plural to refer to the indefinite: “And whoso fyndeth him out of swich blame, They wol come up…” (The Pardoner’s Prologue, c. 1395). Here the plural they refers to the indefinite whoso.

Other writers who’ve used this dodge include Shakespeare, the translators of the Authorized (King James) Bible, Byron, Austen, and Auden.

While use as a reference to indefinite pronouns has had widespread acceptance for centuries, many grammarians have objected over the use of they to refer to singular nouns of either sex. But this too is an old practice.

Swift used it: “every fool can do as they’re bid” (Polite Conversation, 1758). Other writers who’ve engaged in this practice include Thackeray and Orwell. It’s not as common as use to refer to indefinite pronouns, but it has existed for centuries and been used by many great writers.

Finally, in the last two decades, themself, as opposed to the standard themselves, has been picked by some to be a gender-neutral replacement for himself and herself. Traditionally, themself has been considered an incorrect form, although it was the preferred form up until about 1540, when it was replaced by themselfs and later themselves. This reintroduction of the old form in a new role offers one way out, although many bridle at this usage as ungrammatical. (And my version of Microsoft Word keeps automatically “correcting” it as an error as I write this article.)