Editor & Publisher used to run ads reminding journalists that certain words were trademarked and should be identified as such. The examples I recall were for Kleenex® and Kitty Litter® which more correctly, when writing generically, should be replaced with phrases like “nasal tissue” and “cat box filler.” The tone was cordial but stern.
Just think about it. When did Xerox® become synonymous with “photocopy?” And when did “FedEx®” become the catch all for “overnight shipping?” We ask for “Coke” when the term should be “cola,” unless we are adamant about not getting a “Pepsi®.” Some of that casual “slippage” is due to great marketing. Some is due to carelessness by us writers.
Has anyone noticed that with the advent of the iPhone and iPad, there’s no little “R” after those words? I assume Apple intentionally wants them to become household words. Of course, as writers, we would be more correct in saying “smart phone” and “e-reading device” when reporting on broad mobile trends, but these words are much more descriptive.
Ethnic and cultural words have also migrated into the mainstream. There was a time when “bagel” was a Jewish breakfast roll and when “bling” was street slang for gold chains and such. Now they’re common in conversation. We order “tacos” and “gyros,” “croissants” and “sushi.” We “kvetch” (complain) and say “Cheers!” as if we were in London. We wear “berets” and “pashmina” shawls. And of course, who can resist a good “cannoli?”
But we’ve corrupted words, too, by turning innocuous language into something menacing. “Going Postal” comes to mind. “Watergate” is another — in fact, there are a lot of “gates.” And of course “911”will never be said without conjuring up images of terrorism.
Headline writers have also given us new words in trying to be witty when describing celebrity pairings: “Beniffer,” “Bradjolina” and “TomKat” are particularly popular, although I remember “Bill & Hill” kicking around for a while.
I also marvel how nouns have become verbs. When did “impact” morph? We used to say, “The impact of the explosion rocked the building.” Now we say, “How will that ‘impact’ the situation?” Ditto for “incentive.” I always thought that was a noun, but now I hear: “How can we ‘incentivize’ the sales staff? How can we ‘incent’ the consumer? ”
And of course there are buzz words that are introduced academically in professional seminars, only to be propagated pathetically in corporate presentations. For a while it was “synergy” and “paradigm;” now it seems to be “contextual” and “forward leaning media.” That prompts me ask at what point does a clever word become a cliché?
Much word migration has sprung from technology, and that’s kept language interesting. There’s “wyswyg” (what you see is what you get) and “escape,” “jpegs” and “pdfs.” We “Zip” files to make them smaller and we “Friend” acquaintances. And who can forget the humble “blog” which can be enjoyed “24/7.”
But few words are as much fun to say as “Google” which is almost synonymous with “research” these days. So, let me “Google that” and ponder it over a “Starbucks” (aka “coffee”) as I “Tweet” (comment) on my “Netbook” (or small laptop of any other name) and try to ignore the legal implications of copyrights, service marks, and trademark registrations. It’s much easier that way – and a lot more colorful.
Tags: Coke, colloquialism, evolution, FedEx, iPhone, Kitty Litter, Kleenex, trends, word choice, Xerox
Categories: Reflection, Words