MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS
It's easy to find glossaries for helping people differentiate between pairs or groups of words that are commonly, easily and understandably difficult to distinguish one from another. There are other words, however, that are not so much confused with other word as they are just frequently incorrectly used; they are misunderstood words. Why they are misunderstood is no real mystery; there are a number of reasons: some simply sound like other words; some have been misused in the media and the misuse has caught on to the public. So I took it upon myself to compile a list of such words to offer clarity. This list is yet in its infancy, so I expect that it will continue to grow for some time; please check back at your leisure.
(NOTE: An asterisk (*) before a word indicates a recently added word.)
(NOTE: An asterisk (*) before a word indicates a recently added word.)
AIN'T: I know. The first word on my list is the word that you've been taught since age 2 "is not a word." Well, I'm here to tell you that, if it's not a word, that's a pity. I talk about this word on the "Grammar" page, so I won't repeat my entire diatribe on the subject. Suffice it to say, that "ain't" should be a word to replace the grammatically inconsistent but "proper" use of "aren't" as long as it isn't used in place of "isn't." That's all I have to say on that.
*AMBIGUOUS: Far too often, this word is mistaken to mean "vague." I admit that "vague" and "ambiguous" are related, however distantly, but they are by no means synonymous. "Vague" means "unclear," leaving a reader or listener perplexed about what, if anything, was just said. "Ambiguous" means "open to two or more [very clear] interpretations." In other words, if a statement is ambiguous, it could mean one thing or another, but either way, something is understood, whereas if it is vague, nothing is understood.
DISABUSE: Many people assume, for obvious reasons, that this term has something to do with "abuse". It doesn't. You can disabuse a person of an idea, which means to help that person to realize that a certain idea is, in reality, a falsehood. Years ago, North Americans believed that cigarette smoking was glamorous and healthy; we have since been disabused of that notion.
DISRESPECT: This term is becoming more and more popularly used as a verb, when it is not really a verb--not yet. Keep going, and in another decade it will be, and, to be honest, maybe it should be. People will say, though, "don't disrespect me," and it's considered incorrect. Yet it seems logical that if you can respect someone you should be able to disrespect that person, too. I guess that the bottom line is this: if you have a grammar stickler for an English prof, don't say or write, "I won't disrespect you." Rather, say, "I won't show you any disrespect." In time it won't be a problem. For now, you have your grade to think about.
*ENORMITY: So often misused to mean "enormousness," this word's definition is slowly beginning to change to accommodate the misunderstanding. "Enormity" has to do, not with immense size, but with intense wickedness approaching the point of horror. For instance, the aging disorder that affected Robin Williams' character, Jack, in the movie of the same name, is called Progeria syndrome. The enormity of this very real, very rare disorder is difficult to imagine.
*EXTRAORDINARY: While this word seems to always be used correctly, I often hear people asking about it, because it doesn't make sense to them: "If something is "EXTRA-ordinary" then it should be really boring, but people use it to say that something's cool. I don't get it!" The cause of their confusion is our culture's misuse of "extra." We use it to mean, "additional," as in "an extra helping of dessert." So they assume that something that is "extraordinary" must be "additionally ordinary." But "additional" is not a synonym for "extra," "beyond" is. When you get an "extra serving" you're getting "a serving beyond what you expect or deserve." Therefore, if something is "extraordinary," it is something "beyond the ordinary." Voila, it makes sense.
HYSTERICAL: A situation cannot be "hysterical;" it doesn't mean "exceptionally funny;" it was originally an extraordinarily sexist term that referred to a person loosing control of "HER" (specifically) emotional stability. The "hyst" refers to the womb, as in, "hysterectomy." These days, any person can be hysterical, and it simply means that she OR HE is laughing uproariously or even maniacally. A situation, however funny it may be, cannot be called "hysterical;" rather, it is correctly referred to as "hilarious."
INCREDULOUS: This term does not mean "amazed," or "stunned," or "fascinated." If you take the word apart, you'll find that the root is "credible." Something that make you feel incredulous is something that lacks credulity (if you'll please pardon the use of the redundancy); you look on it with a sense of doubt not astonishment. If someone is incredulous, he or she is more skeptical than amazed, more dubious than fascinated.
*INDIVIDUAL: This word is often erroneously used in place of "person." But, in reality, it is very seldom used correctly as a noun. It is primarily an adjective--a word used to describe a noun--that means "not to be divided," as in "individual slices of cheese." You should not, however, use it to refer to a person, as in the introduction to "The Lone Ranger" TV show: "He was an astounding individual." The only time "individual" should be used as a noun is to indicate a person's singleness in contrast to a group: "Will you be dining with a group or as an individual;" a group can be divided; the person cannot. In short, if you can use the word "person" rather than "individual," then do so.
INGENUOUS: Some people use this word to refer to someone who seems to be not genuine, and the confusion is understandable. A person who is ingenuous is naïve, unworldly, not suspicious, but is usually regarded in a positive light: "ingenuous and charming" are complementary sentiments. A person who is "disingenuous" is not genuine, but in a very specific way: He or she is pretending to be naïve, but is not; so a disingenuous person may be, in actuality, quite dangerous, else he or she would not feign an ingenuous personality.
LIGHT-YEAR: Okay, everyone, let's get this one straight. A light-year is not a period of time; you will never find out how long a light year is because it has no relation to seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, decades . . . You're more likely to find HOW FAR a "light-year" is because it's more closely related to inches, feet, yards, miles and so on. A "light-year" is the DISTANCE light can travel in a year. That is to say, if you chase a photon departing the sun on January 1, 2000 at the speed of light, the light-year is how far you are from the sun on January 1, 2001.
*NAUSEOUS : This term is often used to indicate that the person using the term has the feeling of nausea, when, in reality, the word refers to a cause of nausea. So the person who says, "I'm feeling nauseous," is in fact saying, "I'm feeling like I'm making someone feel nauseated." Something that induces vomiting is "nauseous." When you feel like vomiting, you feel "nauseated."
OBVIATES: It is a common misconception that "obviates" means "makes obvious," and it would be a great word if that were true, because that would be a cool word; unfortunately, there is--to my knowledge--no such word. "Obviates" is more closely synonymous with "avoids," "evades" or "eliminates," and that which is avoided is negative. You wouldn't obviate sunshine after days and days of rain, unless, perhaps, you got burned in a tanning booth during the rainy days. Sunshine is a good thing, so the use of "obviate" is inappropriate when you're referring to sunshine. But during those days and days of rain, you might want to use your umbrella to obviate wet clothes.
PERSUADE: You cannot persuade a person that a certain idea is true, that is "convincing" a person. You persuade a person into taking some sort of action, but you convince him or her that some action or idea is either right or wrong.
*RETICENT : Often misused to mean "reluctant," "reticent" actually means "reserved." Its similarity with "reluctant" would be that a person who is reticent is reluctant to speak, but the similarity ends there. Again, however, "reticent" is so often misused as a synonym for "reluctant," that many dictionaries are now adding "reluctant" as a tertiary definition.
U F O: This term is the one I find the most annoying on this list. "U F O" is NOT synonymous with a spaceship or any intergalactic craft. It CAN refer to that, but ANY object in our atmosphere is a U F O if the person seeing it doesn't know what it is. It might be a meteor; it could even be a flying, flubber-fueled, Ford Model 'T'; it could be an airplane or a particularly dense cloud. The point is, if something (therefore an Object) is in the air (therefore Flying), and you don't know what it is (therefore Unidentified), it is (not, "it could be") it IS most distinctly a U F O.
*VERY: If you do a quick survey in any standard dictionary, you'll see that most words that begin with "V-E-R" deal in meaning with the idea of "truth." "Very" is no exception. We use it to mean "especially" in everyday use, and, to be honest, we're not doing the word any disservice with that understanding, but then, how does it fit in with other "V-E-R" words? Tell you what, for the next day, every time you want to use the word "very," substitute "truly." You'll find that it works every time because "truly" is the real meaning of "very."
*AMBIGUOUS: Far too often, this word is mistaken to mean "vague." I admit that "vague" and "ambiguous" are related, however distantly, but they are by no means synonymous. "Vague" means "unclear," leaving a reader or listener perplexed about what, if anything, was just said. "Ambiguous" means "open to two or more [very clear] interpretations." In other words, if a statement is ambiguous, it could mean one thing or another, but either way, something is understood, whereas if it is vague, nothing is understood.
DISABUSE: Many people assume, for obvious reasons, that this term has something to do with "abuse". It doesn't. You can disabuse a person of an idea, which means to help that person to realize that a certain idea is, in reality, a falsehood. Years ago, North Americans believed that cigarette smoking was glamorous and healthy; we have since been disabused of that notion.
DISRESPECT: This term is becoming more and more popularly used as a verb, when it is not really a verb--not yet. Keep going, and in another decade it will be, and, to be honest, maybe it should be. People will say, though, "don't disrespect me," and it's considered incorrect. Yet it seems logical that if you can respect someone you should be able to disrespect that person, too. I guess that the bottom line is this: if you have a grammar stickler for an English prof, don't say or write, "I won't disrespect you." Rather, say, "I won't show you any disrespect." In time it won't be a problem. For now, you have your grade to think about.
*ENORMITY: So often misused to mean "enormousness," this word's definition is slowly beginning to change to accommodate the misunderstanding. "Enormity" has to do, not with immense size, but with intense wickedness approaching the point of horror. For instance, the aging disorder that affected Robin Williams' character, Jack, in the movie of the same name, is called Progeria syndrome. The enormity of this very real, very rare disorder is difficult to imagine.
*EXTRAORDINARY: While this word seems to always be used correctly, I often hear people asking about it, because it doesn't make sense to them: "If something is "EXTRA-ordinary" then it should be really boring, but people use it to say that something's cool. I don't get it!" The cause of their confusion is our culture's misuse of "extra." We use it to mean, "additional," as in "an extra helping of dessert." So they assume that something that is "extraordinary" must be "additionally ordinary." But "additional" is not a synonym for "extra," "beyond" is. When you get an "extra serving" you're getting "a serving beyond what you expect or deserve." Therefore, if something is "extraordinary," it is something "beyond the ordinary." Voila, it makes sense.
HYSTERICAL: A situation cannot be "hysterical;" it doesn't mean "exceptionally funny;" it was originally an extraordinarily sexist term that referred to a person loosing control of "HER" (specifically) emotional stability. The "hyst" refers to the womb, as in, "hysterectomy." These days, any person can be hysterical, and it simply means that she OR HE is laughing uproariously or even maniacally. A situation, however funny it may be, cannot be called "hysterical;" rather, it is correctly referred to as "hilarious."
INCREDULOUS: This term does not mean "amazed," or "stunned," or "fascinated." If you take the word apart, you'll find that the root is "credible." Something that make you feel incredulous is something that lacks credulity (if you'll please pardon the use of the redundancy); you look on it with a sense of doubt not astonishment. If someone is incredulous, he or she is more skeptical than amazed, more dubious than fascinated.
*INDIVIDUAL: This word is often erroneously used in place of "person." But, in reality, it is very seldom used correctly as a noun. It is primarily an adjective--a word used to describe a noun--that means "not to be divided," as in "individual slices of cheese." You should not, however, use it to refer to a person, as in the introduction to "The Lone Ranger" TV show: "He was an astounding individual." The only time "individual" should be used as a noun is to indicate a person's singleness in contrast to a group: "Will you be dining with a group or as an individual;" a group can be divided; the person cannot. In short, if you can use the word "person" rather than "individual," then do so.
INGENUOUS: Some people use this word to refer to someone who seems to be not genuine, and the confusion is understandable. A person who is ingenuous is naïve, unworldly, not suspicious, but is usually regarded in a positive light: "ingenuous and charming" are complementary sentiments. A person who is "disingenuous" is not genuine, but in a very specific way: He or she is pretending to be naïve, but is not; so a disingenuous person may be, in actuality, quite dangerous, else he or she would not feign an ingenuous personality.
LIGHT-YEAR: Okay, everyone, let's get this one straight. A light-year is not a period of time; you will never find out how long a light year is because it has no relation to seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, decades . . . You're more likely to find HOW FAR a "light-year" is because it's more closely related to inches, feet, yards, miles and so on. A "light-year" is the DISTANCE light can travel in a year. That is to say, if you chase a photon departing the sun on January 1, 2000 at the speed of light, the light-year is how far you are from the sun on January 1, 2001.
*NAUSEOUS : This term is often used to indicate that the person using the term has the feeling of nausea, when, in reality, the word refers to a cause of nausea. So the person who says, "I'm feeling nauseous," is in fact saying, "I'm feeling like I'm making someone feel nauseated." Something that induces vomiting is "nauseous." When you feel like vomiting, you feel "nauseated."
OBVIATES: It is a common misconception that "obviates" means "makes obvious," and it would be a great word if that were true, because that would be a cool word; unfortunately, there is--to my knowledge--no such word. "Obviates" is more closely synonymous with "avoids," "evades" or "eliminates," and that which is avoided is negative. You wouldn't obviate sunshine after days and days of rain, unless, perhaps, you got burned in a tanning booth during the rainy days. Sunshine is a good thing, so the use of "obviate" is inappropriate when you're referring to sunshine. But during those days and days of rain, you might want to use your umbrella to obviate wet clothes.
PERSUADE: You cannot persuade a person that a certain idea is true, that is "convincing" a person. You persuade a person into taking some sort of action, but you convince him or her that some action or idea is either right or wrong.
*RETICENT : Often misused to mean "reluctant," "reticent" actually means "reserved." Its similarity with "reluctant" would be that a person who is reticent is reluctant to speak, but the similarity ends there. Again, however, "reticent" is so often misused as a synonym for "reluctant," that many dictionaries are now adding "reluctant" as a tertiary definition.
U F O: This term is the one I find the most annoying on this list. "U F O" is NOT synonymous with a spaceship or any intergalactic craft. It CAN refer to that, but ANY object in our atmosphere is a U F O if the person seeing it doesn't know what it is. It might be a meteor; it could even be a flying, flubber-fueled, Ford Model 'T'; it could be an airplane or a particularly dense cloud. The point is, if something (therefore an Object) is in the air (therefore Flying), and you don't know what it is (therefore Unidentified), it is (not, "it could be") it IS most distinctly a U F O.
*VERY: If you do a quick survey in any standard dictionary, you'll see that most words that begin with "V-E-R" deal in meaning with the idea of "truth." "Very" is no exception. We use it to mean "especially" in everyday use, and, to be honest, we're not doing the word any disservice with that understanding, but then, how does it fit in with other "V-E-R" words? Tell you what, for the next day, every time you want to use the word "very," substitute "truly." You'll find that it works every time because "truly" is the real meaning of "very."
copyright © 2013 by A. J. Mittendorf
All rights reserved
All rights reserved
