Every morning Dictionary.com sends me ‘The word of the day’. The English has one of the greatest number of words and synonyms, being a language that has incorporated words from Latin, French, Scandanavia (thanks, Vikings!), and anywhere the British Empire exploited people. Some folks despise fancy words when small ones will do the job but I delight in a rutilant lexicon. Why be ‘gray’ when you can be ‘brindled”? Why complain, when you can vociferate?
The number of words actually being used is diminishing. More and more perfectly good words are going extinct from lack of use. Describing a politician as a sollygoster or as dastardly used to be common. Now they are simply crooks and morons. The point is more readily grasped but it sounds somewhat dumbed down. Words I have used all my life are becoming unrecognizable. Patients are often puzzled now when I ask if their medications are efficacious.
I blame technology for the decline in word usage. “Spelling checks” in word processing pressure the typist to write a small easy words. It is more work to go back to edit the proper spelling of a polysyllabic uncommon word. When I type the word apodictic (meaning incontestable and don’t question me) my laptop tells me ‘it is spelled wrong” – and there is no such word (!) To save time, just write a simple word learned in grade school. When we wrote things out in longhand we may have had more misspelled fancy words but at least they were used.
The other culprit in the demise of words is texting. Long elegant words are deemed too tedious to type. Worse, grammar and words disappear while texting. “How r u” and “done come home now” replace actual sentences.
I don’t know about you but I see something sinister in this. Holly-rollers claim civilization is declining due to reprobate living, but I think the loss of a rich vocabulary is more cimmerian.
Spo-Reflections 
35 comments
March 27, 2012 at 2:38 AM
wfregosi
Let us not forget the large infusion of Greek and Arabic into English. The former contributed greatly to our intellectual vocabulary, the latter to our mathematical and scientific terminology.
March 27, 2012 at 8:22 AM
Urspo
I did not know this; I learned something today.
My favorite word from Greek is labyrinth, which is apparently a very very old work predating classical Greek. How marvelous!
March 27, 2012 at 4:02 AM
aunt Barb
aMEN from your linguistic loving grammat nazi kin!;-)
March 27, 2012 at 4:02 AM
RuralBeard
Your observation on our diminishing language strikes a chord with me. While I understand the need to be brief in a text message (each letter-stroke does equal dollars & cents), I place the education system and the media at the heart of this sad state of affairs. It is now common place to eliminate ‘the article’ from one’s speech; witness any radio broadcast or program. “The outbreak occurred at hospital”. “We have here a rock group in studio”. Is it any wonder the youth have no models in which to emulate? The common practice of saying “…as long as one is understood” is not the point; making oneself understood with style, and correctly, should be the mantra for our education instiutions and the media. Don’t get me started on the current trend to begin every sentence with “so” or the cute misspelling of proper names in advertising campaigns.
March 27, 2012 at 5:27 AM
Robert G. Longpré
There is also the problem of deliberate use of simple and powerful words [newspeak – George Orwell] which is about control and forced dumbing down of the citizenry making the world more simplistic – the loss of colour in favour of a polarized black and white world.
March 27, 2012 at 5:34 AM
Jay
I used to tell my 5th and 6th graders that something was for their “Information, elucidation, and edification.” We also played a game called “Bloviation” where we would take simple sentences and exchange the simple easy to understand words with longer “bloviated” words which meant the same thing and have a time to figure out what the original sentence was. Great fun.
March 27, 2012 at 5:39 AM
Shawn
OMG!
O No U din’t!
March 27, 2012 at 8:22 AM
Urspo
🙂
March 27, 2012 at 7:30 AM
Raybeard
What a superb subject matter for a blog this is!
I don’t have an apposite response to hand other than the somewhat trite observation that English, more than any of the other ‘major’ languages has become, because of the ‘magpie’ characteristics of its speakers (largely originally through British Empire colonisation), such a hybrid language that it truly is something to be celebrated. So don’t let’s fall into the trap of condemning ALL of its foreign conquests in every possible way. There was, despite many of the appalling acts committed in that dubious era, at least one area where we, English speakers, have been wonderfully enriched.
Although I can well understand the French protectiveness of their own language, evident in many organs of their culture, I am so much happier that there is no equivalent movement in English. It would, anyway, be pretty near impossible to insulate it from international influences.
March 27, 2012 at 8:20 AM
Urspo
It is fascinating to me the ironies of how English became a dominant language in India. It is my understanding English was able to ‘unite’ many regions through a common dialect.� Yet, when the Empire left, the Indians did not abandon English but see it now as a sign of good education. To be skilled there, you need to speak English.� Now, India is a major economy and their English helped create their own ’empire’ in a way.
________________________________
March 27, 2012 at 11:06 PM
Raybeard
Yes, that is certainly a curiosity – and something of which to be justifiably proud.
On the other side of that is the dreadful imprint left of (mainly) Victorian-era morality on British Empire member-countries in Asia and Africa which has been adopted into their constitutions and even into the mind-sets of their citizens. Well over a century later, we are still living with the horrid effects of those oppressive times where, oddly, even developing countries appear to be most reluctant to ditch those perverse attitudes so enshrined. However, it is heartening to see that in India there are now significant stirrings to shake off the latter influences.
But your blog was about LANGUAGE, so I’m sorry I’ve strayed so far from your chosen theme. .
March 27, 2012 at 7:45 AM
Mark
So I despise fancy words! Don’t call me “some folks”!
m.
March 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM
Sean
I think the problem goes deeper further back than technology. It’s a combination of failing education, less reading and no more conversations/discussions during dinner.
March 27, 2012 at 8:17 AM
Urspo
Those seems like apodictic variables, indeed.
________________________________
March 27, 2012 at 8:27 AM
Cameron
I, too, deplore the “dumbing-down” trend of language, but it IS possible to express oneself well — even eloquently — with simple, small words. A good writer arranges words artfully; they don’t have to be fancy.
March 27, 2012 at 8:37 AM
Glen Warren
I respectfully disagree. Studies have shown that the number of words used in the English language have been steadily increasing; about 14 new words are created each day. Taken from Forgotten English by Jeffrey Kacirk: “The English language, like any living thing, is in a constant state of flux. Just like cells in our body each day die and are replaced by new ones, an almost inperceptible attrition in vocabulary also takes place.”
What you are bemoaning is the lack of “flowery” language. The main reason for language is to communicate. You can use efflusive words to get your point across, but will you be understood?
March 27, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Urspo
You have good points. I suspect it is the number of synonyms that is overall diminishing in use and number. While this makes communication more practical (Example: using the word ‘bear’ is readily understood, while ‘ursine” is not), I would argue language is more than just communication.� It is also artistic expression.I’ve read Bibles in ‘plain every day English” and it pales to the beautiful (but archaic) words in the King Jame’s version.
As a hack writer – and a reader – I sometimes want the elegant prose of great writing rather than the type of words used in an instruction manual.� Food sometimes is mere fuel; sometimes it is “cuisine”.� Language is similar.
________________________________
March 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM
Glen Warren
I concur about the need for expression. To use your analogy, we could just subsist on protein/carb packets to get our nutritional needs met, but we would quickly lose interest in food altogether. I still stand by my statement of the primary use for language is communication. How you use those words for communication is up to the user.
You wish people would be more perspecacious, but there’s a fine line one must walk. Being too erudite alienates, creating resentment, jealousy, and perhaps bitterness. Language, and thusly communication, must be tailored to the recipient. I’m originally from Newfoundland and must change how I talk when I visit as not to appear to “hoity-toity,” but that changes when I’m with my collegues, as it does when I’m doing a presentation.
My point is that you mustn’t greive the loss of words that are no longer in favour, but to have a sanguine attitude towards our ever-changing language.
March 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM
Will J
“Describing a politician as a sollygoster or as dastardly used to be common”
I believe that they are still scurrilous dastardly cads hopeful only that there may be a scintilla of human decency cloaked in darkeness and buried deep within. Although the words may have changed, human nature has not.
March 27, 2012 at 9:11 AM
Cubby
But what about all the new English words that have entered our vocabulary over the last century? Words like microprocessor, laser, ultrasonic, and neutrino. Words are born when a need for them arises. Words are forgotten when then need wanes. I don’t think the English language is necessarily shrinking. Perhaps it is just shifting.
March 27, 2012 at 11:11 AM
Urspo
Indeed. Languages are continually evolving and changing and incorporating new words. Presently Spanish words are becoming part of the lexicon, much to the dismay of the ‘Speak English Only” sorts. Not a new phenomena, being hostile your native language will become polluted. I hear tell in France they are quite guarded about non-French words (while in Germany they are quite open to foreign words).
New words enter English, but this is less so, and more words are dissipating, so the number of words being regularly used is generally decreasing.
________________________________
March 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM
wfregosi
I don’t know about now, but there was a time when English words were being embraced by the French — I remember le parking, le dancing and le camping. In France there were signs that said STOP whereas in Quebec they still said ARRET.
March 27, 2012 at 3:01 PM
jmcanuck
But, in fairness, France French and Joual (Québec French) aren’t the same thing – and neither is Acadien (the French where we’re living in eastern Canada) for that matter. Three languages, the same roots but taking in different directions. Loan words are common in all languages – we’re going to Tokyo in October and might see some “basabaru” (baseball)
Languages are living things that grow and shrink. I do, though, bemoan the loss of precision. “Grey” are “brindled” aren’t exactly the same thing – put someone in a room with two cats telling them “The grey cat’s a sweety who loves belly rubs. The bringled cat will, however, tear your arm off. Go!” In that situation, it’d pay to know “brindled” means grey with darker areas.
Yes, precision — le mot juste. 🙂
March 27, 2012 at 2:37 PM
Greg
I still text using complete sentences. People tend to view me as a freak when I do that.
March 27, 2012 at 3:24 PM
Urspo
I try to text complete sentences too. Happily I am a fast typist, so this is not too bad an impediment.
________________________________
March 27, 2012 at 2:58 PM
the cajun
This is all part of the dumbing of society. It’s really more than that. To communicate you must use words that fit the culture (?) and not those that would force anyone to search out a dictionary. G*d, forbid!
March 27, 2012 at 5:07 PM
truthspew
Try using some technical terms – freaks spell correction out almost to the point of laughter.
March 27, 2012 at 8:31 PM
Erik Rubright
I don’t think the change in language represents a dumbing down of society at all. If anything, I think it allows people to communicate more effectively and efficiently, thereby increasing the sharing of thoughts and ideas.
But I tend to be a troglodyte when it comes to word usage, and subscribe to the concept of “Keep It Simple”. Then again, I see language in the form of pictures more so than words.
March 27, 2012 at 9:53 PM
Peter
It’s called progress, only nobody knows where it goes and how it ends.
March 27, 2012 at 10:28 PM
wcs
I text not. Do you remember this: f u cn rd ths, u cn bcm a gd secy. I think I read that on a matchbook cover once. Matchbook covers were texting before it was cool.
Please excuse me while I go roll some holly.
March 28, 2012 at 6:01 AM
domanidave
In a post the other year, I wrote the following:
“Though I love words, I do try to keep an eye on their sell-by dates. Alas, certain words – ‘cunning’ comes to mind – are off-limits unless you’re Sir Percy Blakeney, AKA The Scarlett Pimpernel.”
Otherwise, perhaps it’s not my place to take offense while on another person’s blog space, but I do in the case of Mr. Warren’s characterization here with regard to “flowery” language. He states: “You can use efflusive [sic] words to get your point across, but will you be understood?”
Pardon my candor, but in order to be understood, it is also important to use the correct word. Case in point, the word “effusive” doesn’t mean what he seems to think it means.
March 28, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Glen Warren
Efflusive: unrestrained or excessive. In the wrong context excessive, “flowery” language does not effectively communicate. I used that word because I believe restraint should be used if you want to communicate effectively. You have to know your audience. I could have used simpler language, but I believe Urspo appreciated the discourse.
March 28, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Glen Warren
You may have thought I wanted to use “effusive” which means exuberant or gushing, but that word does not have the connotation I intended. Efflusive usually pertains to a foul smelling gas or liquid, but used as an adjective efflusive language puts people off in the same manner.
March 29, 2012 at 6:33 AM
Mitchell Block
I agree with you but I don’t know if “cinnamon” has anything to do with the decline of civilization… (only kidding, I swear).
March 29, 2012 at 8:52 AM
seriouslyflippant
Spo, the muses have handed you a topic. Run with it. There’s more digging to be done here, clearly.