0

WELCOME BACK LINDA

LINDA'S CORNER

By Gregory Pence

Newsweek

Aug. 6, 2007 issue - As a professor of bioethics, I strive to teach my students that clear writing fosters clear thinking. But as I was grading a stack of blue books today, I discovered so many clichés that I couldn't help writing them down. Before I knew it, I had spent the afternoon not grading essays but cataloging the many trite or inaccurate phrases my students rely on to express themselves.

When I grade written work by students, one of the phrases I hate most is "It goes without saying," in response to which I scribble on their essays, "Then why write it?" Another favorite of undergraduates is "It's not for me to say," to which I jot in their blue books, "Then why continue writing?"

I also despise the phrase "Who can say?" to which I reply, "You! That's who! That's the point of writing an essay!"

In teaching bioethics, I constantly hear about "playing God," as in "To allow couples to choose X is to play God." Undergraduates use the phrase constantly as a rhetorical hammer, as if saying it ends all discussion. And I don't even want to get into "opening Pandora's box" or "sliding down the slippery slope."

Sometimes the clichés are simply redundant, as when my students write of a "mass exodus." Can there be a "small" exodus? "Exodus" implies a mass of people.

Other times the expressions defy the rules of logic. A student in a philosophy class writes that philosophy "bores me to tears." But if something brings him to tears, it's certainly not boring.

I also fear that most students don't know what they are saying when they write that a question "boggles the mind." Does every problem in bioethics really boggle the mind? What does this mean?

My students aren't the only ones guilty of cliché abuse. The language of medicine confuses patients' families when physicians write, "On Tuesday the patient was declared brain dead, and on Wednesday life support was removed." So when did the patient really die? Can people die in two ways, once when they are declared brain dead and second when their respirators are removed? Better to write, "Physicians declared the patient dead by neurological criteria and the next day removed his respirator."

All of us repeat trite expressions without thinking. My TV weatherman sometimes says, "It's raining cats and dogs." Should I call the Humane Society? Where did this silly expression come from?

Another common mistake involves "literally." I often hear people on election night say, "He literally won by a landslide." If so, should geologists help us understand how?

Then, of course, there's the criminal who was caught in "broad daylight." I guess he could not have been caught in "narrow" daylight. And are we sure that the sun shone on the day he was caught? I sometimes read about a "bone of contention." I imagine two animals fighting over a bone from a carcass (and not, as students write, from "a dead carcass"). But do writers want to convey that image?

And how can we forget about the "foreseeable future" (versus the "unforeseeable future"?) and the "foregone conclusion" (versus the "non-foregone conclusion"?).

Spare me jargon from sports, such as being "on the bubble" for something. I'd also rather do without other jargon, such as "pushing the [edge of the] envelope." And has writing that we should "think outside the box" become such a cliché that it's now in-side the box?

Some of the worst phrases come from the business world. Because of my profession, I read a lot of essays on medicine, ethics and money. So I must endure endless strings of nouns acting as adjectival phrases, such as "health care finance administration official business." Even authors of textbooks on business and hospital ad-ministration use such phrases; no wonder that students use them, too.

And in these fields and others, can we do away with "take a leadership role"? These days, can't anyone just lead?

Can we also hear more about the short arm of the law (versus its "long" one), about things that sell well besides "hotcakes" and about a quick tour other than a "whirlwind" one?

Beyond the shadow of a doubt, I'd like to leave no stone unturned in grinding such writing to a halt, saving each and every student's essay in the nick of time. But I have a sneaking suspicion that, from time immemorial, that has been an errand of mercy and easier said than done.

Pence lives in Birmingham, Ala.

Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Love it; thanks, Linda, for bringing it to Tracy's attention so he posted it in full. I'm as guilty as anyone in the overuse of cliches, especially in oral communication. There are many legal cliches, too, which we in the profession unfortunately are prone to use in our writings. I've wondered often if an attorney worked hard at elimination of these from briefs, etc., whether a court would reward him/her, or if the court would not be able to understand the point the attorney is attempting to make.
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
 
I PREFER PLATITUDES...HA!
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Danny said:
 
I like this!
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
This is probably really old and everyone has heard it many times. I'm old and have a short memory so get to laugh at old jokes again the next time. ;-)


A bear walks into a bar in Billings, Montana and sits down. He bangs on the bar with his paw and demands a beer.

The bartender approaches and says, "We don't serve beer to bears in bars in Billings."

The bear, becoming angry, demands again that he be served a beer.

The bartender tells him again, more forcefully, "We don't serve beer to belligerent bears in bars in Billings."

The bear, very angry now, says, "If you don't serve me a beer, I'm going to eat that lady sitting at the end of the bar."

The bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve beer to belligerent, bully bears in bars in Billings."

The bear goes to the end of the bar, and, as promised, eats the woman. He comes back to his seat and again demands a beer.

The bartender states, "Sorry, we don't serve beer to belligerent, bully bears in bars in Billings who are on drugs."

The bear says, "I'm NOT on drugs."

...........You're gonna love this........

The bartender says, "You are now. That was a barbitchyouate.
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
GROAN!!
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
(As every thread is, by Tracy's public affirmation, an "open thread"....)

Latest on the Newark, NJ tragedy. I feel there is gang involvement here, obviously not based on any information made public to date.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/09/schoolyard.killin...
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
"DHS to take over no-fly list compliance from the airlines" is my headline for the linked piece. Can't help but think there's more form than substance here. Uniformity, however, in dealing with the "rules" is welcome, as article indicates that the individual airlines were not uniform in their procedures.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/09/dhs.security/inde...
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Some good writing on the current health care debate, which wonders whether Mitt Romney has become a victim of Alzheimer's concerning the Massachusetts plan adopted while he was Governor.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/...
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
Vaughn, I think there is more form than substance to ALL the so-called airport security measures. I see none of it being anything but show and am amazed at the numbers of people who think it is keeping them safer. I don't have much (if any) confidence in the Department of Homeland Security, don't think they handle what they currently have on their plate well and won't do any better at something added to the list. I don't even think it will bring uniformity to the rules.
 
posted 835 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Linda, I agree. If we, as a country, were really serious about airport security, I suggest we would be following the Israeli model.
 
posted 834 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search