No, Actually, What DO You Mean?

So, one of the phrases I most hate in the English language; "Oh, well, you know what I mean."

*mumble, grumble, snarl, growl*

As a matter of fact, no I don't. I may be able to to guess what you mean with some accuracy. I might be able to divine a general, fuzzy concept from your speech. It's possible I can land somewhere in the general vicinity of your gist, much in the same way a thrown grenade may harm some fellows over there. *waves hand vaguely in no particular direction*

Do you know why my comprehension of your meaning is so indistinct? Because YOUR USE OF THE LANGUAGE IS SO INDISTINCT, FUZZY AND INACCURATE! *huff, puff, gasp*

Sorry, dear Reader, I don't really mean you, specifically. I am, of course, addressing an imaginary antagonist to make a point. That point is this the English language is filled with all manner of very specific words with very specific meanings which the vast majority of the English speaking world ignores or misuses resulting in a blending of definitions that is eroding the language as a whole. What exacerbates the issue is most people seem not to care and actually get defensive if you bring it up.


This takes many forms. Sometimes a person uses a word incorrectly when they really meant a word that is somewhat similar in either meaning or sound. For example, in the above paragraph I might have said either 'intensifies' or 'exasperates' instead of 'exacerbates'. 'Intensifies' is somewhat comparable in meaning, though not quite right, while 'exasperates' sounds similar but is not even close to the right word. Other times someone uses a vague word or set of such words to describe something that requires much more specificity, the word's vagueness being either inherent or a result of extreme overuse. Then there are the catch phrases or words the meaning of which become altered because they are commonly and repeatedley misused either through ignorance or because they are associated with some emotionally charged issue.


So, you get speech like this:


"I PRECEDED down the hall LITERALLY scared to death. The doors were all SCARY and I HATE SCARY doors. I COULD care less about windows, AND I HATE the doors."

So, 'preceded' should have been 'proceeded'. 'Literally' is incorrect or we wouldn't be having this conversation. 'Scary' is far too vaque to be of any use to me as a description. It is quite unlikely that anyone without an actual phobia would 'hate' a door rather than merely dislike it...perhaps even strongly dislike. If you 'could' care less about windows you actually must care some, which is the opposite meaning of that which this phrase is supposed to convey. I COULDN'T care less means you literally do not have the ability to care less than you do showing that the subject holds no importance to you. The conjunction 'and' should be a 'but' to show the contrast between the lack of caring about windows and the strong feelings against doors.

Now, the above speech is still fairly understandable because I couldn't bring myself to hack it up any more than that, but you get the point...I hope. The deterioration of our language is making it harder and harder to hold meaningful conversations. We're runnning out of words with which to say things because we have become verbally lazy and the words no longer hold the meaning they once did.

Don't believe me? Go read a speech by Abraham Lincoln. When's the last time you heard someone talk like that?