XP: Written Word/English Language&Reading Material

originally posted by Peter Creasey:

I was mystified when my email word processor objected to my speaking of someone who "snuck out of sight" (and I see it is underlined in red here as well). It would never have occurred to me to say the person "sneaked out of sight".

Interesting.

. . . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

It’s quite understandable, Pete. As Stephen Pinker explains in The Language Instinct (well worth reading IMO), languages evolve to become more regular with time. In this case, we’re evolving away from an earlier system that conjugated verbs by modifying stems (think take vs took or stand vs stood) toward a system where past tense is created by the suffix “-ed.” Children learning grammar make this mistake commonly since, as Pinker points out, they learn language through the application of grammatical rules. My personal peeve is the increasing use of pleaded instead of pled.

Mark Lipton
 
Sneak has changed in its conjugation from an irregular to a regular verb (another way of saying what Mark did). Snuck was the original past tense. Sneaked is the more modern one. Either is technically correct, but snuck is frowned upon. So it depends on whether you think snuck is a hill worth dying on. This board knows I have my hobbyhorses. This is not one of them.
 
Thanks, Jonathan, I was wondering how you stood on this.

I'm not sure, in fact I doubt, that I would have used "pled" instead of "pleaded". Of course this is not a word that I come in contact with much. I assume your stance on this usage is similar to the sneak/snuck issue.

. . . . . Pete
 
Same with pleaded and pled. I mostly use pleaded--he pleaded for his life--but in legal contexts go with pled--Trump pled innocent to tax fraud and everything else. I have a Joycean, narrative indifference to what other people use.
 
originally posted by MLipton:
As Stephen Pinker explains in The Language Instinct (well worth reading IMO), languages evolve to become more regular with time.
Click to expand...
Does that mean that we, as a society, are doing away with 'varietal' ?
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by MLipton:
As Stephen Pinker explains in The Language Instinct (well worth reading IMO), languages evolve to become more regular with time.
Click to expand...
Does that mean that we, as a society, are doing away with 'varietal' ?
Click to expand...

Why? It’s a perfectly good adjective, Jeff. [insert appropriate emoticon here]

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

I'm still hard-pressed to find a verb that is as perfectly descriptive as using "dialogue" or "dialoguing" as a verb.

. . . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

Does it offer some nuance of meaning beyond “discuss”?

Mark Lipton
 
Or talk. But I don't think Pete can be talked out of it. As Keats might say, it is proved on his pulses. Keats is talking about foundational beliefs and not semantics. But, though I believe that following one's gut leads to faulty logic and a ruined digestion, it is a common practice.
 
Mark, good question. Yes, it does to me. I use "dialogue" as a verb in business and it seems to have the right "ring" to it for a beneficial give and take on a business matter. "Discuss", to me at least, doesn't have the same "weight" (or whatever term might be better) for what I prefer.

Actually, I first heard the usage during a business conference from someone who we were in negotiations with.

I did a google for a word that I might like as well but haven't found anything, but I'm receptive.

. . . . . . Pete
 
Of course. A business meeting. A place where writing is called wordsmithing and influential is called impactful. Of course impactful might be different in that it might more nearly involve a punch in the nose than persuasion.
 
Jonathan, I thought maybe you might provide an alternative verb with a meaning as impactful such as what I intend when I use "dialogue" as a verb.

. . . . . . Pete
 
So, Pete, confer doesn’t suffice? I don’t know if in your usage there’s any adversarial connotations; if so, there’s parlay and bargain, too.

Mark Lipton
 
I think "converse" is the verb he's looking for, if not too genteel.

Converse as a noun is a shoe. Dialogue as a verb is as grating as varietal as a noun. But esthetics differ, and most don't give a tuppence ha'penny about esthetics, especially in biziness.
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

Jonathan, I thought maybe you might provide an alternative verb with a meaning as impactful such as what I intend when I use "dialogue" as a verb.

. . . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

In order to answer this, I need to know why "discuss" or "talk" won't do for you. The last example you gave, many messages ago, struck me as a euphemism hiding what was really meant. Many of these expressions work to veil meaning rather than express it, or to suggest something the speaker is unwilling to say or doesn't know s/he means. Wordsmith for write is a prime example. A blacksmith makes horseshoes work, but he doesn't do the job of riding the horse. A wordsmith cleans up your grammar rather than showing you how your lack of grammar hides from you the fuzziness of your thought. I expect, if I had more examples of where you think dialogue works rather than all the hundreds of other verbs we have for to say, I could specify more clearly what secret work it was doing. Although I must say, it didn't take long to suss out what impactful and wordsmithing were doing.
 
Confer to me means interacting with colleagues.

Parlay and bargain come across as very casual.

Converse is a word I hadn't thought of and it comes close but doesn't have a business ring to it in my view.

Dialogue --
dictionary.com -- an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue, especially a political or religious issue, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement or settlement. [my suggestion: maybe insert "business" also]

clark.edu -- Dialogue, unlike debate or even discussion, is as interested in the relationship(s) between the participants as it is in the topic or theme being explored.

udayton.edu -- dialogue is “a communicative process in which people with different perspectives seek understanding.”

The three forgoing definitions seem to suggest a more encompassing meaning for "dialogue" than any of the other suggestions; thus, resonate better with my usage.

. . . . . . Pete
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:


Dialogue --
dictionary.com -- an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue, especially a political or religious issue, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement or settlement. [my suggestion: maybe insert "business" also]

clark.edu -- Dialogue, unlike debate or even discussion, is as interested in the relationship(s) between the participants as it is in the topic or theme being explored.

udayton.edu -- dialogue is “a communicative process in which people with different perspectives seek understanding.”

The three forgoing definitions seem to suggest a more encompassing meaning for "dialogue" than any of the other suggestions; thus, resonate better with my usage.
Click to expand...

Right. But those three examples are using dialogue as a noun, not a verb. Business-speak is not necessarily English and often sounds pompous.
 
originally posted by mark e:

Right. But those three examples are using dialogue as a noun, not a verb. Business-speak is not necessarily English and often sounds pompous.
Click to expand...

Pompous or crude?

I go both ways on this. I really dislike hearing dialogue as a verb in everyday speech. Gift as a verb is even worse. Adds nothing beyond 'give'.

BUT, when my favorite rappers/poets/authors (see James Joyce) play with language those ways, it is inspiring and beautiful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top