TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:RE: Words That Are Often Misused From:"McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com> To:Tony Chung <tonyc -at- tonychung -dot- ca>, Lauren <lauren -at- writeco -dot- net> Date:Mon, 28 May 2012 15:14:24 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Chung
>
> I was thinking more about his disgust at the misuse of "ironic" to
> mean "coincidence" (ever since the Alanis Song). "Her death wasn't
> ironic, it was tragic. If her death somehow made you feel good, then
> THAT would be ironic."
And really, since when did every unfortunate or painful thing
become "tragic"?
See? THAT is loss of utility in the language. You can no longer
properly write that some event is tragic. No one will understand
you. They will 100% of the time assume that you mean merely that
the event was uncomplicatedly sad or unfortunate. The old meaning
of "tragic" and "tragedy" (as a professor of theater or literature
might mean it) is mostly lost.
If you wanted to convey the meaning, you'd need to quote the paragraph
of definition from a good dictionary, rather than use the word
itself.
Even a professor of theater or literature, reading your sentence
with "tragic" or "tragedy" would assume that you intended the
dumbed-down meaning, since that's what 99% of writers mean these
days. The modern users think the dumbed-down meaning of "tragic"
conveys more heft or sounds more impressive than "sad" or
"unfortunate" or "premature". Which is odd, since such shallowness
usually assumes that it's the physically bigger word, or the word
with an additional syllable, that makes the writer sound more impressive.
> And never use whom-anything unless referring to who as an object. The
> writers got that one wrong.
Bless you, my son. :-)
- k
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help. Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need.
Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.
