Skip to main content

Words, words, words...




A couple of items in the media caught my attention and started me thinking about the strange beast that is the English language.

Firstly, there was an interview on Radio 5 Live with two people in Corby in connection with the story about birth defects and the link with toxic waste. During the course of the interview both interviewees either used a word incorrectly or made up a word. In both cases, on first hearing, it was almost possible to believe that the words were correct, but something jarred and the errors made me laugh and despair at the same time. In the first instance, the interviewee said that "the council was clearly negligible" in their dealings with the toxic waste. In the second instance, a few seconds later a second interviewee said that "the ruling showed that there had clearly been neglection on the part of the council...". I assume that the first interviewee meant to say negligent and the second neglect, but the two mistakes started me thinking about the English language, how difficult it is to use correctly, how easy it is to create plausible alternatives and how flexible we are both in using and interpreting the language. After all, in both instances I understood what the speaker intended (I think!).

Which brings me to the second item. The big technology story of the day was the announcement of the "co-operation" agreed between two of the major players in technology and household names (and words) to boot - Yahoo and Microsoft (or more specifically Bing). The story focuses on the merger of these two famous names who are seeking to take on the dominant force in the market, Google. It is no co-incidence that the name Google has now become the Sellotape of its day (or Scotch if you are American or French!), making the crucial leap from proper noun to verb in daily use.

John Connell has already blogged about the Scottish alternative meaning to Microsoft's choice of search engine brand name which I'm quite sure the brand marketeers back in Seattle never considered. But will we really talk about "binging" someone, have we ever talked about "yahooing" something and will the Yahoo/Bing merger bring about a new term for the English language that we will adopt into common parlance? (Ying? Boo??) The power of language is such that unless this new partnership can coin a term that can compete with that of Google, almost regardless of the quality of the search engine, it will probably have failed before it has even begun. We tweet, we google, I dare say we even possibly facebook (??), but are we likely to bing? (Personally I think Boing would have been a much better name, but then what do I know?).

All I can say is let the people decide and let the language come to the fore. Whatever name is used, we'll probably change it anyway. As we say round these parts, plus ca change... Who'd be an English teacher?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Lots of testing, very little learning.

"I don't understand why I have to do all these tests. I mean, it's not as if I'm learning anything." These were the words of my son, a few days ago. My son is in P7, his final year of primary school, and so far his year has been blighted. Blighted by tests, dozens and dozens of them. Blighted by the incessant, soul destroying grind that is the transfer test, formerly known as the 11 plus. Since Easter, the entire focus of his schooling has been working towards the transfer test in November. The intensity is building up. First practice tests completed in April, May, June. Then, the summer revision pack, "just to keep his eye in". And now he's in P7, all systems are go: 2 practice tests a week, another to do at home at weekends. When he's not doing a practice test, he's reviewing a completed practice test or practising for the next practice test. The tests he does are either numeracy or literacy or both and that is all he does; day in, day o...

Just saying...

I found myself perusing Microsoft's Innovative Education Forum website earlier today to see what was what and I thought I'd have a quick look at the FAQs. And then I came across Question 12... Now, I'm not making a major point here, but it just jarred somewhat to see these restrictions placed on a conference aimed at celebrating innovation. Not even a sneaky wee photo of a key note speaker to pop onto Flickr or a handy flip video of a top demonstration to share on YouTube??? Wouldn't that create a bit of buzz and excitement? Guess we'll never know! Hmmm....

Call me a pedant...

Alastair Darling spoke on Eddie Mair's show on Radio 4 this evening. He was talking about the steps George Osborne is taking to address the banking system and its perceived problems. In relation to these steps, Mr Darling said that "no banking system can ever be safe" but that any steps being taken should be intended to "make the system safer". Clearly this makes no sense. If the system cannot be safe, then surely it cannot therefore be SAFER ie more safe. Call me a pedant Mr Darling, but I think you meant that the steps would make the system less unsafe. I just hope I haven't made any spelling or grammatical errors in this post! That is all...