"at the end of the day..."

grrrrrr

'on a daily basis'

'on an ongoing basis'

'myself' when you mean 'I'

'in receipt of' and most other passive constructions

and though I know it's accepted academic-speak, 'he referenced her'

I remember a correspondence in (I think) The Independent, about how many words you could remove from the notice stuck to a public telephone and have it still make sense:

this payphone is emptied on a daily basis

The conclusion was, almost all of them.

Emma

"like" as a replacement for "said"

ie, "and she's like, yeah, but he's like, no way, and I'm like, worrevva, I mean sha-aap, roii!!"

Picking up on a few points in this thread (yes, I know it's late, but I've been kind of busy on my day-job lately):

1. Comments and feedback on one's work:
Any comments and feedback from a 3rd party are welcome, as far as I am concerned. I, for one, have had too little such reaction. On the occasions when I've had negative feedback, I can, indeed, see its accuracy and relevance, and will make changes if I feel that is what is needed. However, one needs to be aware of when one is being asked to write a different story to the one intended. Sometimes I may have a good reason for having done things the way I have, and in such cases I may opt not to change things (but, boy, if you try to explain your reasons on this site, don't you get shot down in flames!)

2. Un-cool authors (or however we want to label them):
Yes, I read many of the authors others have named. Fleming, in particular (the James Bond in the novels is way more complex and interesting than the character in the films), as well as Asimov, Terry Pratchett and Larry Niven. I even used to read Enid Blyton when I was a kid (please don't kill me!) Maybe, one day when the hype has died down, I might even get to reading Harry Potter... or is that going too far?

3. Words/phrases that should (sorry, ought... sorry, might be...) banned:
Is this only from these threads, or from what we write as well? If I can't express a conditional, I for one am going to have trouble. Whilst I have some sympathy for the irritation many people feel for such overdone phrases as "at the present time" and "at the end of the day", I would only advocate reducing their usage, not avoiding them completely. In my experience, even the most annoying "noise phrase" might sometimes find a place in well-crafted writing. Even words like "nice" have their uses (it's a place in France, ain't it?)


Alex

A few quick thoughts:

A real, serious worry is the use of 'may' where it should be 'might'

My only objection to 'at this moment in time' is that it's a needless elaboration, as in, what's wrong with to 'now' or 'at the moment'?

And of course you can use any phrase you like, if you put it in the mouth of the right character.

I agree that the literary James Bond is a much more interesting character than the movie one, and I was mildly in thrall to him as a teenager, but I must admit the whole Bond thing has lost its gloss for me since I discovered that Fleming himself was very into S&M. Explains a lot about the books - not least James's surname - but somehow now I know that, they just seem very silly. Or maybe I've finally grown up.

Emma

Emma,

I was under the impression that the name James Bond came from the author of a book about Caribbean birds (of the feathered variety!) Fleming thought it was a sufficiently boring and anonymous name that it would suit someone whose profession meant he ought to be anonymous.

As far as Fleming's personal life goes, I don't know anything about him being into S&M, but I do know he had some rather irritating opinions about women (always expressed through Bond, of course, but clearly Fleming's personal views nonetheless). At one point, he even, via a rather tortuous sequence of logic, blames the fall of the British Empire on women being given the vote. But what do we expect from an Etonian born in 1908? And who but Fleming could get away with giving female characters names like "Truly Scrumptious", "Pussy Galore" or "Mary Goodnight"?

As to phrases like "at this moment in time", I've always felt it depended on whether we were talking in the present tense about the current moment in time, or reporting something we were thinking of at some time in the past. Its shorter name might, therefore, either be "now" or "then". Even so, using a longer phrase sometimes allows a more subtle expression of relative timing of events. This is why I don't automatically rule out the use of such long-winded ways of saying things. (I remember having an argument in a French class at school about why the phrase "la veille" means "the day before", rather than "yesterday". The answer is that you aren't necessarily using it in the present tense, so the day before isn't always yesterday. Therefore, expressions of time need some thought before declaring them redundant, or before using them automatically.)


Alex

Yes, if you read Bond as a product of his author's time, it's more understandable, and sexism more tolerable in a period piece. I must admit, I lost interest in his world when I discovered Le Carré.

You're right about expressions of time. It's when people say 'at this moment in time' not because they want that degree of precision, but just because it sounds fancier, that I get annoyed.

And it's not just fussiness. Fancy language is so often used to hide unpalatable truths, political or social, that the more we accept it, the easier it'll be to hide things.

Emma

When it comes to people using overblown words and phrases to sound posh or officious, one of my pet-hates is the use of "velocity" (or, worse still, "rate of velocity") to mean "speed". American officialdom (police officers and the like) seem to be the most common sources of this misuse of the term.

Another one (even more made-up than "rate of velocity") is "irregardless".


Alex

'An added bonus'

Emma

"fairly sure"