Monthly Archives: October 2010

Words That Shouldn’t Be Allowed To Die

From the Department of Scary Statistics, we get the report that the average 15 to 24 year old now spends an average of eight minutes a day reading.  Yes, reading.  Not only that, one third of US teenagers send over 100 text messages a day and people aged 8 to 18 now spend 7.5 hours per day interacting with an electronic device such as a cell phone, computer, iPod or TV.  And because they multitask they actually are getting something like 11 hours of media “exposure” in those 7.5 hours. 

A lot of people think that this is wonderful and inevitable and that people like me, who wonder if it’s really all that wonderful, are reactionary Luddites who should get with the program. 

Maybe, but recently I’ve found that I’m having increasing difficulty communicating with technophiles.  Partly that’s because they never look up from their cell phones, but also it’s because of an increasing divergence in world view and communication techniques.  I’m not just talking about the fact that they don’t have a historical or literary frame of reference or think that Thor is really just a comic book character.

I’m talking about words which are rapidly falling into disuse.  Every year someone publishes an article about new words that have come into the lexicon.  Words like tweet, and unfriend.  But no one talks about the very rich words that are being forgotten as communication increases exponentially in volume while decreasing equally exponentially in content. 

With that in mind, I’ve pulled together a list of words that should not be allowed to die.  Of course there are a lot more words on the endangered list, but this is a sampler.  Because some of them may already be obscure, I’ve given the definition.  And for the benefit of the many Gen Y people who regularly read this blog, I’ve included an example of how the word can be used in daily conversation.  Here goes:

Behoovev. Although some people may think this means getting a new pair of Boho boots, it actually means necessary, proper or advantageous.  Is it applicable today?  You betcha:  “Amber, I saw the pics from your party out on Facebook.  It might behoove you to take them down before you apply for a job.”

Desuetuden. Discontinuance from use.  A description of the words we are talking about, and this word should be kept alive because technological change demands its use, as in: “Ever since I got my iPad, my iPod and phone have so fallen into desuetude.”

Euthenicsn. A science that deals with development of human well-being by improvement of living conditions.  I admit, there is a bit of snob appeal to this word because a lot of people won’t know if you are talking about ‘eugenics’ or ‘euthanasia’ and think that it’s time for a moral argument.  But no one in their right mind would be against ‘euthenics.’  As in, “I’m so into euthenics.  I mean, imagine if everyone had an iPad.”

Hebetatev. To make dull or obtuse.  “OMG this teacher is so boring he actually hebetates sex education!”

Ineluctableadj. Not to be avoided, changed or resisted; inevitable.  “Josh and I are so going to the Prom together.  It’s like totally ineluctable.” 

Jejuneadj. Lacking interest or significance, lacking maturity.  “OMG, if her Tweets get any more jejune I’ll have to stop following Paris Hilton.”

Mountebankn. A person who sells quack medicines from a platform; a boastful, unscrupulous pretender.  You may have noticed that in the blogosphere you can’t always tell the mountebanks from the real experts.  Your friend may say, “Some mountebank sold me this fake Gucci bag on eBay.”

Nugatoryadj. Of little or no consequence, trifling, inconsequential, having no force.   “My mother said she would ground me if I go to the concert next week.  And I’m like, ‘Mom, that’s totally nugatory.’”

Pusillanimousadj. Lacking courage and resolution, marked by contemptible timidity.  As in “Josh broke up with me by sending a text.  I mean, how pusillanimous can you get?”

Perspicacityn. Acute mental vision or discernment.  “Well, Josh finally got the perspicacity to dump her.”

Quotidiann. Occurring every day; routine.  Another word whose appeal comes in part from it not sounding anything like what it means.  As in “Downloading iPhone Apps from Apple’s Apps store has gotten to be so quotidian.”

Reconditeadj. Hidden from sight; incomprehensible to one of ordinary understanding or knowledge.  “Have you seen Grand Theft Auto IV?  Some of the new features are totally recondite, man.”

Please join me in using these words and saving them from extinction.  Now that you know what they mean, prevent verbal desuetude by, in your quotidian conversations, demonstrating your perspicacity by using these words.  It is not ineluctable that you will hebetate your conversation and the risk of being branded a mountebank is nugatory.  Only jejune and pusillanimous people won’t appreciate your recondite efforts at euthenics!  It behooves them to get a dictionary!

Finally, Some Research That Makes Sense!

Every once in a while I come across a report about some sort of mind boggling research that some academic has conducted.   Like the guy who attempted to link the obesity epidemic with increasing portion sizes in paintings of the Last Supper.  Or the guy who advocates etching an outline of a fly in public urinals because men will aim at the fly and as a result “spillage” will be decreased by 80%.  The report I saw made this assertion but didn’t explain how the measurements were made.  Or by whom.

Usually I end up wondering how the people who do this research got the money to do it.  But the other day I found some research that although a little bizarre, could have major benefits for civilization.

A psychology professor at Manchester University decided to study the effect that sound has on our ability to taste our food.

As a person who is put off by restaurants where music is blasted from speakers strategically located above each table, I read the findings with interest.

They found that when we are subjected to ‘white noise,’ we lose the ability to taste our food.  The airlines (who may well have paid for the study) are ecstatic because now they have a scientific explanation why airplane food is so bad—actually, it’s really pretty good but because the engines and ventilation system of an aircraft create a lot of white noise, we just can’t taste it!

Apparently there has been a lot of debate on how sound affects our sense of taste.  There is a celebrity chef named Heston Blumenthal, who I must admit I’d never heard of, who has taken the idea to its illogical conclusion.  At his restaurant when you order a certain seafood dish, it comes with an iPod (which I don’t think you get to keep) that has sounds of the ocean on it.  You listen to the iPod while eating your seafood special and it is supposed to taste better.

At first I thought that wouldn’t be something you should order on your first date because it might be a bit anti-social to listen to an iPod while eating.  But it turns out that this seafood dish is part of a 17 course meal so you won’t be tuned out all night.  In fact the whole thing is a real extravaganza—the seafood dish is served on a crate with a glass top.  The crate is filled with what looks like sand and seashells (to remind you that you are eating seafood). 

But guess what?  It’s not sand!  It’s a mixture of tapioca, breadcrumbs, “crushed fried baby eels, cod liver oil and langoustine oil topped with abalone, razor clams, shrimps and oysters and three kinds of edible seaweed.” 

I guess that means you can eat it.  But all I can think of is my mother’s old admonition:  Don’t play with your food!

It gets better.  For people who haven’t yet figured out that they are eating seafood, they “have the juices from the shellfish [yuck] made into a foam and placed along one side of the tapioca dish, so it looks like the sea.  Alongside the dish we’ll serve a glass of seaweed extraction [double yuck] and mirin, which will give diners a massive umami hit.”

I know you don’t believe me, but it’s true.

Anyway, back to sound and food, at first I was happy, thinking that restaurants would take heed and turn down the noise so that we have a chance to (1) taste our food and (b) talk to each other while eating.

But on second thought, I think we may be doomed after all.  The accountants responsible for restaurants’ bottom lines will put two and two together.  Realizing that loud music means we can’t taste the food properly means that they can cut down on food quality and camouflage it by increasing the volume. 

And the result will be a proliferation of bad restaurants with bad food blasting bad music.

Give me that iPod.