Trendy Words I Do Not Like

[marshwiggle]

FLOTUS
POTUS

and probably SCOTUS?

It's kind of odd that the "OTUS" part is what makes them different from other countries, but the terms, (POTUS, FLOTUS, SCOTUS), are only used within the US, i.e. in communication with people for whom those would be assumed.

[aside]

Some of the above reminded me of another one:  deliverable, as in "The deliverables we expect from this committee's work are ..."

[dismalist]

Creatives.  Something about turning that often meaningless adjective into a noun just grates. Why not call us artists or musicians or whatever?
Weary when wary is meant

In Hollywood, "talent" is a noun used by people in production. It is used to describe actors and writers, who are the material used in their product. The term is used to dehumanize the raw material a bit, while at the same time fluffing the talent's egos.

My wife, the doctor, working in a hospital, is confronted with a middle management group called "talent management". Now there's a contradiction in terms!

[Katrina Gulliver]

"Receipts", when used to mean "evidence" - usually in the form of screenshots.

Not trendy, but the word "methodology". I've yet to read an academic article where the author couldn't have just said "method" or "approach".

[Langue_doc]

Posted by: marshwiggle
« on: September 28, 2020, 05:22:40 AM »Insert Quote
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 27, 2020, 08:06:46 PM
FLOTUS
POTUS

and probably SCOTUS?

It's kind of odd that the "OTUS" part is what makes them different from other countries, but the terms, (POTUS, FLOTUS, SCOTUS), are only used within the US, i.e. in communication with people for whom those would be assumed.


These words have an interesting history, going back to the days of the telegraph, courtesy of Merriam-Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/scotus-potus-flotus

[marshwiggle]

Posted by: marshwiggle
« on: September 28, 2020, 05:22:40 AM »Insert Quote
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 27, 2020, 08:06:46 PM
FLOTUS
POTUS

and probably SCOTUS?

It's kind of odd that the "OTUS" part is what makes them different from other countries, but the terms, (POTUS, FLOTUS, SCOTUS), are only used within the US, i.e. in communication with people for whom those would be assumed.

These words have an interesting history, going back to the days of the telegraph, courtesy of Merriam-Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/scotus-potus-flotus

Interesting

Occasional nonce-usages of -OTUS will come up, such as COTUS (constitution) and TOTUS (teleprompter, in a dig at President Obama's ostensible use of them). Time will tell if additional -OTUS words continue to join our language.

I'm sorry; COTUS is just too close to COITUS to catch on.

[fourhats]

My wife, the doctor, working in a hospital, is confronted with a middle management group called "talent management". Now there's a contradiction in terms!

"Talent management" is used in university administration too. It's used in HR to refer to attracting and keeping good candidates, among other things. There are now people with that title in academia.

[ab_grp]

I am getting tired of seeing "react", as in "Celebs react to So and So's Baby News!" or, on LinkedIn, "Be the first to react." 

[dismalist]

Impacted! I was impacted by the loss of electricity. How about "I was affected by the loss of electricity"?

[aside]

I was impacted by a spinach and cheese casserole.

[Vkw10]

I was impacted by a spinach and cheese casserole.

I hope you did not suffer burns or contusions.

[mahagonny]

Multicultural and multiculturalism.  The words, and fact that they are mantras.

[apl68]

I was impacted by a spinach and cheese casserole.

I hope you did not suffer burns or contusions.

Sounds like the impact was probably more internal.

[ergative]

Ludic.

It's extremely trendy in the Times Literary Supplement, and it's getting on my nerves. I'm not sure it actually means anything.

[Treehugger]

Not trendy, but just an incorrect word choice that has annoyed me recently and that I just read in the NYTimes:

The President is charging into unchartered territory.

Nope. "Uncharted," not "unchartered." Into an unmapped territory, not into a territory without a constitution, although ... hmmm..... now that I think about it, maybe that was some kind of Freudian slip on the part of the NYTimes.