Phrases/words that set your teeth on edge.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Lat-Literal
    Guest
    • Aug 2015
    • 6983

    Originally posted by french frank View Post
    The word 'lawmaker' meaning the elected politicians in various countries seems to be getting commoner. Is it is just a recent journalistic shorthand brought over from the USA? Or did I never notice it before?

    [Of course, I know that national legislators are technically lawmakers, but when did the word become commonly used over here e.g. by the BBC?]
    In the 1990s, I would certainly often have the word "legal" in my drafts at work replaced by the word "lawful". Consequently I adapted - and I never went back. At the very least, there is a difference in nuance there which is possibly brought out best with "illegal" and "unlawful". The first is screaming sirens. The second says gently "this is not permitted".

    (I suppose I still do use "illegal" when being emphatically outraged - "you are discriminating against the lawfully obese but have nothing whatsoever to say on illegal drug takers")

    Comment

    • Pabmusic
      Full Member
      • May 2011
      • 5537

      Originally posted by french frank View Post
      The word 'lawmaker' meaning the elected politicians in various countries seems to be getting commoner. Is it is just a recent journalistic shorthand brought over from the USA? Or did I never notice it before?

      [Of course, I know that national legislators are technically lawmakers, but when did the word become commonly used over here e.g. by the BBC?]
      There is at least a point in its use in the USA, because of their quite clear separation of powers. Congress and the Senate are the legislative branch, quite literally the law-making branch. It's so different in the UK, where Parliament contains members of the Executive and (in the Lords) the Church, who are also members of the Legislative and thus lawmakers. Its such a diffence that 'lawmakers' means nothing useful in Britain.
      Last edited by Pabmusic; 19-10-17, 23:35.

      Comment

      • Serial_Apologist
        Full Member
        • Dec 2010
        • 37591

        Push back.

        When did this (to me) childish phrase come into vogue?

        Wasn't "opposition" good enough??

        Comment

        • Richard Tarleton

          (topically) Safe Space

          Comment

          • jean
            Late member
            • Nov 2010
            • 7100

            The idea, or just the name?

            Comment

            • Richard Tarleton

              The idea - but the name is very annoying also. Good piece in today's Times by Philip Collins, on how Generation Snowflake needs to learn to argue. The panel discussion on Newsnight the other night was so irritating that I had to no-platform it from the safe space that is my sitting room.

              Comment

              • Serial_Apologist
                Full Member
                • Dec 2010
                • 37591

                Originally posted by Richard Tarleton View Post
                The idea - but the name is very annoying also. Good piece in today's Times by Philip Collins, on how Generation Snowflake needs to learn to argue. The panel discussion on Newsnight the other night was so irritating that I had to no-platform it from the safe space that is my sitting room.
                Listening to this morning's interviewers interrupting every second sentance of their interviewees, I was reminded of Humphrys being asked by Tony Benn what the purpose of the interruption was, and replying that this was to stop said interviewee avoiding or shilly-shallying around giving an answer. I for one would like to hear what the politician, celebrity, bureaucrat or whoever is saying in reply, so that I can find out what the nation is being spoonfed by its informers, whether or not I agree with it - otherwise my attention is diverted into tightening up in anticipation of the reply being interrupted or spoken over, so I never get to hear; and I'm willing to bet one of the reasons why young people are finding it difficult to conduct an argument is that such arguments being conducted on air between people posing as experts in such a way that their interruptions circumvent protocols with appeals to avoidance of truths or, especially, lack of time, is hardly conducive for instilling either the discipline or the ethos necessary for reaching any kind of judgement as to which side is offering a reliable prospectus on which to make a judgement.

                Comment

                • ahinton
                  Full Member
                  • Nov 2010
                  • 16122

                  Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
                  Listening to this morning's interviewers interrupting every second sentance of their interviewees, I was reminded of Humphrys being asked by Tony Benn what the purpose of the interruption was, and replying that this was to stop said interviewee avoiding or shilly-shallying around giving an answer. I for one would like to hear what the politician, celebrity, bureaucrat or whoever is saying in reply, so that I can find out what the nation is being spoonfed by its informers, whether or not I agree with it - otherwise my attention is diverted into tightening up in anticipation of the reply being interrupted or spoken over, so I never get to hear; and I'm willing to bet one of the reasons why young people are finding it difficult to conduct an argument is that such arguments being conducted on air between people posing as experts in such a way that their interruptions circumvent protocols with appeals to avoidance of truths or, especially, lack of time, is hardly conducive for instilling either the discipline or the ethos necessary for reaching any kind of judgement as to which side is offering a reliable prospectus on which to make a judgement.
                  Good points indeed. The problem with so many of these interviews, however, is not just the interruption habit on the part of the interviewer but the pre-scripted "answers" on the part of the interviewee when, for example, it is so irritatingly obvious that, when a question that primarily seeks a "yes" or "no" answer but gets anything else that will to avoid this, it is clear that the interviewee has no intention of answering the question.
                  Last edited by ahinton; 20-10-17, 15:29.

                  Comment

                  • Lat-Literal
                    Guest
                    • Aug 2015
                    • 6983

                    "Even those Cabinet ministers who are furious with Hammond about his behaviour over Brexit are glad that the Treasury is acting as a restraining influence on how much money is going to be pumped into Northern Ireland to gain the Ulstermen’s (sic) support. There is a growing worry among ministers that the public will loathe the idea of taxpayers’ money being used to keep them in office. “‘The optics are terrible,” one member of the Government admits." (The Sun, 17 June 2017)

                    The optics?

                    What is this dreadful phrase that I first had the misfortune to hear on "The Daily Politics" today from three different contributors?

                    The technical side remains tough but the optics are slightly better.

                    Not that it is a breakthrough.

                    (Should have gone to Specsavers?)

                    Comment

                    • MrGongGong
                      Full Member
                      • Nov 2010
                      • 18357

                      Originally posted by Lat-Literal View Post
                      The optics?

                      Terrible .... no Talisker

                      Comment

                      • ahinton
                        Full Member
                        • Nov 2010
                        • 16122

                        Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                        Terrible .... no Talisker

                        Worse still, no single malt at all!

                        Comment

                        • french frank
                          Administrator/Moderator
                          • Feb 2007
                          • 30245

                          Originally posted by Lat-Literal View Post
                          The optics?

                          What is this dreadful phrase that I first had the misfortune to hear on "The Daily Politics" today from three different contributors?
                          'North American: (typically in a political context) the way in which an event or course of action is perceived by the public.
                          "the issue itself is secondary to the optics of the Democrats opposing this administration in a high-profile way" '

                          The more worrying thing about the import of handy US words and phrases is that with that may come the American way of perceiving.
                          It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                          Comment

                          • teamsaint
                            Full Member
                            • Nov 2010
                            • 25193

                            Originally posted by french frank View Post
                            'North American: (typically in a political context) the way in which an event or course of action is perceived by the public.
                            "the issue itself is secondary to the optics of the Democrats opposing this administration in a high-profile way" '

                            The more worrying thing about the import of handy US words and phrases is that with that may come the American way of perceiving.



                            What do you understand that to be ?
                            I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.

                            I am not a number, I am a free man.

                            Comment

                            • Lat-Literal
                              Guest
                              • Aug 2015
                              • 6983

                              Originally posted by french frank View Post
                              'North American: (typically in a political context) the way in which an event or course of action is perceived by the public.
                              "the issue itself is secondary to the optics of the Democrats opposing this administration in a high-profile way" '

                              The more worrying thing about the import of handy US words and phrases is that with that may come the American way of perceiving.
                              I'm not surprised.

                              Had you heard of it before?

                              I hadn't heard of it before today.

                              Originally posted by teamsaint View Post
                              [/B]

                              What do you understand that to be ?
                              In this context, "the American way of perceiving" may be based on what the public is mainly given, fake or not.

                              Comment

                              • french frank
                                Administrator/Moderator
                                • Feb 2007
                                • 30245

                                Originally posted by teamsaint View Post
                                [/B]

                                What do you understand that to be ?
                                Perceiving what? An American perspective on whatever it happens to be.
                                It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X