PROVERBIAL and other tip offs to poor writing

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

why do poor writers feel the need to insert the word PROVERBIAL whenever they use a cliché?
ASS

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 18:58 (twenty-one years ago)

"the proverbial nail in the coffin"
"the nail in the proverbial coffin"
"the proverbial nail in the proverbial coffin"

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

But it's a perfectly cromulent word!

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:01 (twenty-one years ago)

1 entry found for cromulent.

cromulent

cromulent: log in for this definition of cromulent and other entries in Webster's Millennium™
Dictionary of English, available only to Dictionary.com Premium members.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Cromulent is the proverbial $9.99/month word!

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

proverbial embiggens us all

― lawrence kansas (lawrence kansas), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:04 (twenty-one years ago)

ON ACID

― Madchen (Madchen), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:06 (twenty-one years ago)

ha ha embilbo embiggens

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Harder to remember what it means, if you're spaced out.

(x-post)

ha ha embilbo embiggens

I hug you nza just for that, yo.

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 19:10 (twenty-one years ago)

This is even more annoying when there is no proverb which mentions the thing they're talking about like "women's proverbial ability to do more than one thing at once" What proverb it that? huh?

― isadora (isadora), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 20:53 (twenty-one years ago)

That post is like the proverbial egg in the suitcase.

― NA (Nick A.), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 20:54 (twenty-one years ago)

hahaha, yee-ess!
I will steal your idea and make a million dollars, Isadora. But then I will buy you a proverbial nice lunch so there will be no proverbial malice.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 20:54 (twenty-one years ago)

The proverbial writer often packed as many actions into a sentence as she could. She was the proverbiest writer I knew.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 20:56 (twenty-one years ago)

don't trust him, isadora. he's just regifting the proverbial free lunch.

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 21:04 (twenty-one years ago)

"Use other words please."

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 00:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Post-poning the panorama of pardoned proverbs, I'm the proverbial provost of pickles, pears, and Pringle-producing proletariats, and I proceed to pick proboceses profusely as a pistol-packin' proverbial pimp (P.I.M.P.), passively poppin' pussies of provincial princesses not the proverbial purple pricks of prophets.

I live in Sunshine City, and I pick up ashes.

Keep lookin' up deez nutz!!!

― Star Hustler, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:16 (twenty-one years ago)

How did you produce that post prior to using the proverbial "per se"?

― David Beckhouse (David Beckhouse), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Prior to posting the post, I pissed in a pink pot profusely packed with poop. Per se...

― Star Hustler, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:38 (twenty-one years ago)

"Asked if..."

[As in "Asked if he thought the book was a piece of shit, Dale Peck replied..."]

Now really, why do writers feel compelled to let you know that, in the course of their interview they -- gasp! -- asked their subject a question????

― Martha Bayne, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:49 (twenty-one years ago)

"literally" is sort of the anti-"proverbial"

eg, "... literally bankrupting the company."

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Your name is Ann Coulter is a "tip-off" to poor writing.

Ann Coulter.
Keep lookin' up... deez nutz!!! Skank.

― Star Hustler, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 05:59 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.talkingpresidents.com/products-af-coulter.shtml

― Martha Bayne, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:07 (twenty-one years ago)

The proverbial spitting image ...

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:20 (twenty-one years ago)

WOW! Just stumbled into this, at work even ... but I can't decide whether use of the word "ukulelelike" makes for a slam-dunk indictment or permanent exemption. Hmmmm ...

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:27 (twenty-one years ago)

are you kidding? that is so a keeper.

― Martha Bayne, Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Who was it that disagreed with the Chicago Manual Style recommendation to unhyphenate the suffix "-like," on the grounds that it often looks like "transliterated Japanese"?

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Using like as a suffix, is a Northern thing like, you know what I mean like?

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 12:15 (twenty-one years ago)

"literally"

"this album literally smacks you in the face". no it doesn't.

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 12:32 (twenty-one years ago)

from Thom Jurek's Train article on AMG, also lambasted on ILM:
Following a hit is a tough thing for any band, and for Train, a cult band that literally came out of nowhere

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:01 (twenty-one years ago)

I've seen/heard SO many abuses of literally lately, I AM going to literally smack people in the face.

*shoots self in head*

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Not literally, I hope!

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:24 (twenty-one years ago)

horace, what name do you write under?

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Thom Jurek, why?

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:29 (twenty-one years ago)

thought so.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:31 (twenty-one years ago)

(i could tell you, but i kinda don't want it googlable)

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:34 (twenty-one years ago)

(and I like being anonymous)

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:38 (twenty-one years ago)

(but if you email me, I'll tell you)

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:38 (twenty-one years ago)

it's pretty basic math, horace

if you're gonna name names (esp. in this quasi-professional 'pox on our industry' manner), at least level the playing field

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:42 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, sod rules like that. [I am David Aaronovitch, btw, and I apologize utterly for the CANT I spew out twice a week]. Literally is fun. I like literally. If used hyperbolically.

― Enrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:44 (twenty-one years ago)

I didn't start the Jurek thread.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:52 (twenty-one years ago)

sigh

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:54 (twenty-one years ago)

But I see your point.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 15:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Literally.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Zip it up, tiger.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 16:25 (twenty-one years ago)

two months pass...

proto

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:03 (twenty-one years ago)

that said

― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:05 (twenty-one years ago)

I agree with Huckleberry Mann. I think something can only be Proverbial if it's mentioned in the Book of Proverbs (or at least there has to be a specific proverb about it.)
Ergo, you can say "the proverbial eye of the needle" because the "rich man in heaven == camel through the eye of a needle" is an accepted proverb.
Nail in the Coffin == merely a cliche catchphrase, not a proverb. (If I recall, they didn't have coffins in the days of the bible, merely death shrouds.)

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

You guys are so uptight. You need to learn how to chill out and go with the flow. Bad writing is like the proverbial magic carpet ride... on acid. Ergo it's a real kick in the head, if you know what I mean.

― Aimless, Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:30 (twenty-one years ago)

'Nuff said.

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Aimless literally OTM.

― dean gulberry (deangulberry), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:35 (twenty-one years ago)

due to

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:36 (twenty-one years ago)

His characteristic post was proto-OTM.

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 18:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes! The first appearance of "the proverbial egg in the briefcase"!

*sigh*

― NA (Nick A.), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 21:55 (twenty-one years ago)

my 2 pet peeves:

(a) "due to" instead of "because of": this is one which lawyers and jurists are ESPECIALLY guilty of. trains and planes are DUE TO arrive; anything else, it's "because of."
(b) "as per": a pseudo-legalism that seems to have crawled in everyday speech. proper form is "pursuant to" -- there's no such thing as "as per" except among windbags.

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)

The following must die.
"Utilize" instead of "Use"
"Facilitate" instead of "Support"
"At this Point in Time" instead of "Now"

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 7 January 2004 00:45 (twenty-one years ago)

"practicable" instead of "practical" or "possible"

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 7 January 2004 00:46 (twenty-one years ago)

"practactible" is good though, right?

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 7 January 2004 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)

one month passes...

"Utilize" = make use of, less direct than "use" -- nuance
"Facilitate" = make something easier, not quite the same thing as "support" (which implies direct assistance)
"At this point in time" suggests a stepping back from the present for the purposes of evaluating/observing it -- "Now" implies a degree of immediacy and immersion in the moment that "At this point in time" does not

Language needs to be able to express nuances! Let it!

― Clarke B., Monday, 1 March 2004 02:14 (twenty-one years ago)

If you can pick up a spoon and show me the difference between using it and utilizing it, you can pass the class.

― Tep (ktepi), Monday, 1 March 2004 02:18 (twenty-one years ago)

I have even more trouble with 'at this point in time' - it suggests a nuance of someone lying through their teeth.

― isadora (isadora), Monday, 1 March 2004 02:48 (twenty-one years ago)

"Use" can mean "to operate" whereas "utilize" makes it clear that something is being put to a certain use.

"At this point in time" has a distancing effect; hence its link to people lying or being euphemistic.

― Clarke B., Monday, 1 March 2004 02:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Crappy is a nuance, too. "Let me axe you a question" has nuances "let me ask you a question" doesn't. "'Jury' movie doesn't cause audience to 'Runaway'" is a headline with a nuance that "People dug the movie" lacks. "Subliminable" is differently nuanced than "subliminal." Claiming nuance as a defense for poor writing is like protesting that the word has letters, so you can't have misspelled it.

― Tep (ktepi), Monday, 1 March 2004 03:02 (twenty-one years ago)

per se

― Prude (Prude), Monday, 1 March 2004 03:05 (twenty-one years ago)

"in this day and age"

"everything from [thing] to [not altogether dissimilar thing]" (and furthermore, EVERYTHING??)

― jody (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 1 March 2004 03:10 (twenty-one years ago)

I know more about language then you do.

― w4t, Monday, 1 March 2004 03:59 (twenty-one years ago)

than do i?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 1 March 2004 04:14 (twenty-one years ago)

do me!

― The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Monday, 1 March 2004 16:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Clarke, I guess I was talking about the kind of writing I read and write for work, where the aim is to (as close as poss) objectively convey information. Anything that seems dishonest or distancing or more fancy-dancy than necessary puts my hackles up.

― isadora (isadora), Monday, 1 March 2004 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

proverbial hackles, obv. In fact, it quite literally puts my proverbial hackles up.

― isadora (isadora), Monday, 1 March 2004 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

five months pass...

The screen crackles with criminality as a gang of urban predators itch for a kill. The scene erupts into automatic-weapons fire in a drive-by nightmare of screaming car engines, senseless death and destruction set to a thumping rap soundtrack.

The action is not part of a new film, but of a video game.

YAWN. Use other rhetoric please!

"The conversation takes place not in a cafe or bar, but on the Internet."
"The vehicle is not a car, but a three-speed bicycle, and the driver a ten-year-old boy."
"This was not written last week or last year, but in 1654 by a man named Arnolde Creake."

― Paul Eater (eater), Thursday, 12 August 2004 11:11 (twenty years ago)

what?

― antexit (antexit), Thursday, 12 August 2004 13:05 (twenty years ago)

Was that unclear? Sorry. I mean I am sick of that trope in which the first paragraph describes something that sounds familiar, and then the next paragraph delivers the horrifying blow that NO! It's not what you think it is ... it's something else! Maybe I'm the only one annoyed by this.

That's a quote from the New York Times above.

― Paul Eater (eater), Thursday, 12 August 2004 13:12 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.