Showing posts with label jargon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jargon. Show all posts

Guardian ahead of record?

In a previous post, I’ve commented on the media’s peculiar preference for using the phrase ‘ahead of’ when they mean ‘before’ – even though it’s not in common usage among any other native speakers of English.

The record number of instances I’ve seen so far came in a Guardian website report on England’s pathetic performance in the 4th test match against Australia, where ‘ahead of’ appears in the headline, one of the sub-headlines and four more times in the article that follows.

Is this the 21st century version of longstanding proofreading problems at the Grauniad?

Or, given that the article is unsigned, could it be that it was written by a robot that’s been programmed to convert ‘before’ into ‘ahead of’ by another robot who can’t speak English either?

If you can bear it, here are the six specimens that that put the Graunaid ahead of everyone else in this particular race.

Ravi Bopara among five players sent back to counties ahead of fifth Test
• England No3 seeks form with Essex ahead of Ashes decider

'The England batsman Ravi Bopara, whose place in the side is under scrutiny after scoring 105 runs in seven innings, will receive an opportunity to rediscover some form with Essex ahead of the Ashes decider at The Oval.'

'.. managing director, Hugh Morris, said in a statement. "We are aware that we underperformed with bat and ball at Headingley and this decision is designed to give players an opportunity to spend time in the middle and get overs under their belt ahead of the decisive fifth Test at The Oval next week."

'Miller was also forced to defend the decision to omit Andrew Flintoff from the side for the fourth Test, insisting it was right to put the advice of England's medical team ahead of the all-rounder's wishes.'

'He will see a specialist today ahead of a decision on his fitness for the decisive Oval encounter ..'


As for which side comes out ahead of the other, we won't know before the final test match comes to an end.

Are you ahead of reading this post?

A few months ago, I posted a 'Jargon and gobbledygook comedy sketch' that was based on various words and phrases in common usage that that I find irritating and/or annoying.

One that baffles me more than most is the ever-increasing preference of writers in the press and broadcast media for using the phrase ‘ahead of’ when they actually mean ‘before’, as in the following recent examples:

‘Man scales plinth ahead of launch.’ – BBC website.

‘Today's co-ordinated attacks came with violence surging in Afghanistan ahead of presidential and provincial elections next month times on line.’ – Times Online.

'Kevin Pietersen will see a specialist about his longstanding Achilles problem ahead of the third Ashes Test at Edgbaston.’ – Sky News website.

In these and the scores of examples you can read or hear every day, wouldn't it sound much more normal and natural if they’d used the good old English word ‘before’.

Is it just me, or did something go seriously wrong with the way I originally learnt to speak (and, as far as I know, continue to speak) my native tongue.

I’m pretty sure I didn’t go to school ahead of going to university any more than I became a father ahead of becoming a grandfather. But I do know that I did both of the former BEFORE experiencing either of the latter.

So can anyone explain to me why is it that so many journalists and editors are so obsessed with using a way of saying ‘before’ that’s not in common usage among any section of the British public (outside the media)?

When did it start being used, and where on earth did it come from in the first place?

I'd really appreciate it if anyone can shed any light on all this going forward – and there’s another one that sounds just as out of touch with common usage and raises much the same questions.

Jargon and gobbledygook comedy sketch


Anyone who runs courses on presentation and communication skills will be all too familiar with the problem of jargon and gobbledygook that was highlighted by yesterday’s announcement that the Local Government Association has published a list of 100 words that it wants to see banned (for news story see here and, for the complete list, see here).

Until last year, I’d never tried my hand at writing anything other than non-fiction, but my wife and I had been finding it difficult to find a double act on the internet that we could perform at an annual event in our village hall – previous years efforts had included a politically correct version of a conversation between Nelson and Hardy before the battle of Trafalgar and one about gardening between God and St Francis of Assisi.

So we started playing around with jargon and gobbledygook, both managerial and youth-speak, and came up with a visit to a clinic by a young woman who was having trouble making herself understood.

The most difficult part was finding a suitable way of bringing it to an end, but the Archbishop of Canterbury came to our rescue with his widely publicised lecture about Sharia law that had happened about a week earlier.

Sad though I may be, I had read and watched the whole speech and had been appalled by the incomprehensibility of his language, and, in particular, by the discovery that one of his sentences was made up of 149 words (i.e. more than nine times longer than the 16 word average sentence length in effective speeches).

High risk though it may have been, I decided to read the whole sentence out and, in Basil Fawlty's immortal words after mentioning the war to the German guests, I think I got away with it.

Anyone wanting to use the following is welcome to do so, but will probably need to modify the ending with a more topical role model than the Archbishop of Canterbury – Robert Peston, perhaps?


THE COMMUNICATION CLINIC
by Max & Joey Atkinson, 2008



(CONSULTANT RINGS BELL)

Next please.

(ENTER CLIENT CHEWING GUM, MUTTERING TO SOMEONE ON MOBILE PHONE)

Ah – hello Miss Fitt.

Hi

How are you today?

I’m good – and yourself?

Very well thanks. And thank you for filling in our psychometric inter-cognitive transactional protocol – from which it looks as though you may be having problems making yourself understood.

You’re so not wrong there.

And that it may be interfering with your social life.

Tell me about it.

No - you’re the one who’s supposed to be telling me about it.

Well at this particular moment in time, I want to address the issue ahead of it getting any worse going forward.

So how often would you say people are having trouble understanding you?

Ballpark figure?

Yes.

24/7.

OK - and what’s made you decide to do something about it?

Well like because I so want to play on a level playing field, and like sing from the same hymn sheet as everyone else.

Hmm – and how does it actually feel when someone doesn’t understand what you’re saying?

Well, like, I mean to say, and to be quite honest with you, it’s literally surreal – and whenever it happens I think: “don’t go there” -- End of.

But you are still going there, aren’t you?

Yeah, but – like - if you’ll just bear with me, the bottom line is that it’s like being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Mm huh.

And, to be quite honest with you I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve been there, done that and got the T shirt.

Hmm.

I mean how weird is that?

And how are you coping with it?

Well, it’s like doing my head in.

Have you tried to do anything about the problem before coming here today?

I’ve tried doing some blue sky thinking, but it – like - wasn’t actually rocket science -- and I just so couldn’t get my head round it.

Anything else?

I’ve had a go at thinking outside the box and running a few flags up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes.

And did they?

No, I never seem to get past first base, because in actual fact and to be perfectly honest with you, someone keeps moving the goal posts.

Have you ever thought about moving the goal posts yourself?

You what?

Ever thought of moving the goal posts your self?

No, cos I’m not empowered and don’t have ownership of them.

Ahhh, you see this is almost certainly why you’re finding things so difficult -- because really good communicators – the really effective ones -- like the Archbishop of Canterbury, aren’t afraid to own the goal posts and move them wherever they like. Your problem is that you speak in shorthand, whereas he speaks in long hand.

Wicked.

The point is, Miss Fitt, that if you’re going to get through to people, you need to start using the likes of him as a role model, and that means making your sentences more like this one, which I’ll read you from the text of the lecture he gave last week.

Cool.

“The rule of law is thus not the enshrining of priority for the universal/abstract dimension of social existence but the establishing of a space accessible to everyone

(MISS FITT STARTS TEXTING ON MOBILE PHONE)

"in which it is possible to affirm and defend a commitment to human dignity as such, independent of membership in any specific human community or tradition, so that when specific communities or traditions are in danger of claiming finality for their own boundaries of practice and understanding, they are reminded that they have to come to terms with the actuality of human diversity...

(CONSULTANT NOTICES MISS FITT ISN’T LISTENING AND COUGHS LOUDLY TO GET HER ATTENTION BACK)

"… they are reminded that they have to come to terms with the actuality of human diversity and that the only way of doing this is to acknowledge the category of 'human dignity as such', a non-negotiable assumption that each agent (with his or her historical and social affiliations)

(MISS FITT YAWNS)

"could be expected to have a voice in the shaping of some common project for the well-being and order of a human group.”

(PAUSE)

So there you are Miss Fitt -- see what I mean?

(LONG PAUSE – MISS FITT LOOKS BAFFLED)

Well, I hear what you say.

And?

Whatever!

Whatever what?

I think he’s completely out of order.