When the Media Set a Bad Example....

[Lisa]

As a college English professor, I am a passionate keeper of the "standards." While I understand that our very young language is flexible and has undergone considerable changes since its Old English form, I have no doubt that George Orwell would be with me when I assert that the media has a duty to keep up a fairly high standard and not spread bad habits. In the digital age, it is especially crucial to set a good example when people are exposed to a barrage of language flying at them day after day out of tv screens, radio speakers and computers.

After having just sounded like a horribly prudish, stick-up-my-butt ole fuddy duddy, I confess that I am also a fan of Bravo's "Project Runway." (I see fashion as art and it is exciting to see people in the throes of the creative process.Yes?) Hopefully, this admission makes me a little seem a little bit more normal...perhaps. However, I cannot stand to hear Heidi Klum announce at the beginning of every show how "the winner" will receive a $100,000 to start "THEIR" own line. My stomach gets a little queasy when that passes her lips episode after episode. Why can't she just say--why can't she be instructed by her producers to say--"his or her" own line to match "the winner" in case and number? Is that so hard? I know it's probably ridiculous to care, but I just do--a lot. Any thoughts, my new friends?

[Eastofoz]

Hi Lisa
Using "their" to refer to his/her is actually gramatically correct when you don't know who the person is. It's usually used in an informal way but can be used formally too. I always thought that was strange too but my grammar bible PRACTICAL ENGLISH USAGE by Richard Swann says it's right--big blurb on it too, must rile a lot of people ;) I guess it's like "If I was you" and "If I were you" both being correct when you'd think it should be "If I WAS" only.

I'm a stickler for convention too but from time to time I wonder if there's much point being that language is often changing and usually to make something easier. For example if you compare some words in American English and their British counterparts the American one has simpler (and more logical!) spelling: color/colour, catalog/catalogue, programme/program etc etc etc. Old English is so complicated looking today that I have to wonder if in the future we'll be using texting language to write because it's simpler: "See U B4 U go". Good food for thought you raised :)

[Ken, Moderator]

Hi, Lisa. Good to have an English prof in the house. I taught a freshman comp class one year and learned that it can be every bit as frustrating as teaching middle school (esp. when college students are free to not attend half the classes... or think they are, anyway).

I agree on the pronoun reference (plural their is wrong when referring to singular winner) argument, but am constantly amazed how one can find a source to refute most any grammatical "rule" (see East of Oz's reference to Swann's way -- a little Proustian humor for you).

What's more, there are even those who would argue about the name of this thread, claiming the word media is plural, therefore the correct title would be "When the Media Set a Bad Example." That sounds wrong to me, but the purists would laugh at all the sounds I hear, I guess.

As mentioned in another thread, the media are in the vanguard when it comes to changing/breaching grammatical rules. I'll cast my lot with Orwell, too (who wouldn't, considering ole George's talent as a writer!).

Keep 'em coming...

[Lisa]

Hello, there:

Thank you for responding to my thread since I'm new here.

I did think about whether I should use "The Media" as plural or singular to refer to the body of people who work in this field. As I mentioned in my original post, the English language is flexible and is often dictated by common usage, and we have come to refer to the journalism profession as a singular entity: The Media. According to present common usage, "The Medium" is the person who tells fortunes; or supposedly helps the police to solve crimes (hee!). So, maybe I shouldn't be so upset by people using "their" to refer to a singular person when the sex of that person is unknown, but I do object to people using it mindlessly.

All that I do know is that my students need training in the use of matching pronouns with their antecedents or the world will plunge towards hell in the proverbial hand basket even faster than it already is. I think that Mr. Orwell would have a problem with this Richard Swann fellow. As you say, one can "prove" almost anything if a half-way legitimate source can be called upon.

If you have never read Orwell's essay, "The Politics of the English Language," you should. In it, he postulates that the deliberate use of words does matter in the sense that language reflects the way that we think, and they way the we think can determine many decisions, such as who to vote for and what lines of propaganda to swallow--or not.

Although the use of a pronoun might seem like a small thing, it all adds up. Trust me, I have read thousands of student essays--these young folks are our future? Yikes! But that is what older generations always say about the younger ones. (Gosh, when did I become the "older generation"? to be honest, I've always cared about these issues.) The ancient Roman authorities were no different.

So, I might reconcile myself to the "their" issue since the problem stems from our modern language having no pronoun to cover both sexes. Before about fifty years ago, the default was always to the male "he," but we all know what problems that can cause. I'll end this post with: What the Sam hell?!!! If Eastofoz is right and we all turn to using texting language eventually, I shall die of its ugliness flooding my soul with its pollution.

[Ruth]

"When the media set a bad example" sounds exactly right to me. Media plural, medium singular.

But what really bothers me is the use of medium/media to mean only the communications media. If communications media is what someone means then that's what they should say, because there are many other kinds of media out there.

A medium is simply a means by which something is done. News media are the means by which we find out the news. A spiritual medium, if you believe that kind of thing, is who puts us in touch with the spirits. I, as an artist, use various kinds of media with which to make art.

You can be sure if I say one of my artworks was done using "mixed media" that I don't mean it was done using TV, newspapers and radio!

So it seems to me that if you're going to say media/medium you need to specify which kind.

[Lisa]

Dear Ruth:

You are so right! Common usage often betrays the full meaning and implementation of words, such as media. In addition to being an English teacher, I am also a painter and involved in the art world in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. "The Media" to refer to communications is narrow and has been exploited by some (Fox News comes to mind...Uh, oh--try not to offend people, Lisa! Hee.) The bulk of people have no idea that this word can refer to so much more, such as how a piece of art can be made with paint, pastels, paper, pastes, photography, collage, etc. Looking forward to hearing more from you.

Lisa

[Ken, Moderator]

The M's in my mnemonic mind seem to recall Marshall McLuhan saying, "The medium is the message."

Singular quote, that.

[Ruth]

Hi Lisa,
I used to show in LA. I'm in OC now, and haven't shown much lately.

R

[Rowena]

Yesterday on CNBC I heard an advert that appeared to depend upon a spelling mistake or ignorance of the difference between the verbs "to affect" and "to effect".

The voice talent very clearly said "affect" twice, as in "News that affects you" and "... to affect change."

[Ruth]

I'm a fusspot about media/medium. The title of this topic should be When the Media SET a Bad Example.

[Scout]

Gabi wrote: "Oh yes! And then there's - Material & Materiel! Who can give me a sentence which shows the meaning of each."

Constructing a house requires material; fighting a war requires materiel.

[Scout]

Which word describes graduates of an exclusively female school - alumni, alumnus, alumna, or alumnae?

[Terence]

Scout wrote: "Which word describes graduates of an exclusively female school - alumni, alumnus, alumna, or alumnae?"

Oooh, oooh - an easy one: it's "alumna" (sing.) or "alumnae" (plur.) (assuming it really is all female).

What seriously annoys me as a former student of Ancient and Medieval history is when colleges refer to a single alumnus as an alumni.

I've come to accept the use of "their" to refer back to a singular subject in some cases (like "every student should bring their books to class") but the loss of the distinction between "fewer" and "less" still bothers me. There's a radio commercial in my market (Los Angeles) where a woman comments that her husband is working "less hours." (ugh)

[Scout]

Lisa, which would you say is correct modern usage? Should we use their to refer to a singular subject; should we use his; or should we use his/her?

[Scout]

:) How should this sentence be completed? Each student should express ____ opinion.

[Debbie, sardonic princess of cheerfulness]

Each student should express an opinion!!!

My current bugbear is passer-bys instead of passers-by....grrrr!!

[Scout]

Scout wrote: ":) How should this sentence be completed? Each student should express ____ opinion."

Fill in a pronoun.

[Ken, Moderator]

his or her

[Ruth]

Gabi wrote: "There needs to be a pronoun that covers both, therefore 'their'. Can't be 'it's'"

It certainly cannot be "it's," woman! It's is "it is."

But you & NE are right. To be absolutely correct it should be "his or her." Common usage, especially conversational, would use "their," though.

That's a major flaw in the English language. We need a single possessive that's nongender.

[Cecily]

Singular their/they is NOT grammatically incorrect; it's a matter of style.

The "rule" was invented by Anne Fisher, an 18th-century British schoolmistress who wrote a popular grammar book, but oddly, has a stronger hold on AmE than BrE. Very few Brits raise an eyebrow at it, much less an objection.

Sometimes it's easy and more elegant to reword a sentence to avoid the issue (as Debbie demonstrated), but sometimes it's far better to use singular "they".

If “you” can be singular or plural, why the objections to “they”? It's not a feminist point about gender-neutral language but a practical acceptance of history and the fact it is useful, widely used and unambiguous.

Just a few thoughts on the subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/mag...

http://motivatedgrammar.wordpress.com... and

http://www.alphadictionary.com/articl....

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexpert... – they don’t mind

[Scout]

When I learned to conjugate verbs, they was always plural.

[Robin]

too over my head

[M]

I always wondered who had invented that business about referents agreeing in number and gender with their antecedents. Little known is that Anne Fisher wasn't the first. Anne's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather invented it in Latin. (He was actually greater than that, considering how many generations back he was.)

[Cecily]

M wrote: "...Little known is that Anne Fisher wasn't the first..."

Very funny. :-)

However, English isn't Latin; Latin isn't even the only source of our vocabulary and grammar. Some of our grammar is similar to Latin's but much of it isn't. Trying to add a Latin straitjacket, especially retrospectively, seems pointless and futile to me.

[Stephen]

Debbie wrote: "Each student should express an opinion!!!

My current bugbear is passer-bys instead of passers-by....grrrr!!"

Are we allowed multiple bugs-bear?

[Debbie, sardonic princess of cheerfulness]

Different rule Stephen!!!

[M]

Anchorwoman: "Next, we'll introduce the new superintendent of schools butt first, a word from our sponsor."

[Robin]

LOL, I don't like when they talk down to kids, we don't have television but when we did, they think kids only like candy and toys, My daughter cares for books, and writing tablets, she has outgrown toys, well some candy she likes.

[M]

Is this the thread for interesting headlines, such as "Drunk Gets Six Months in Violin Case" or "Safety Experts Say Schoolbus Passengers Should Be Belted"?

[Ken, Moderator]

Here's an interesting example of a newspaper that caught hell for using the word "limn" in a headline:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ide...

[Debbie, sardonic princess of cheerfulness]

The Baltimore Sun used the word limn in a front-page headline (“Opposing votes limn difference in race”). That same day, Carol N. Shaw sent a letter to the editor complaining about the paper’s use of the word, calling it “unbelievably arrogant and patronizing” to use a word that she, having graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Maryland, didn’t immediately understand.

I think it is incredibly arrogant and patronizing to take a newspaper to task for using a perfectly real word just because you (being an exalted personage because you graduated from university)personally didn't know what it meant!!

[M]

Sounds as though the University of Maryland should have its accreditation reviewed, if it's graduating people magna cum laude who have a poorer vocabulary than that of a Baltimore Sun reporter.

[Ken, Moderator]

Funny, but I saw the word "limn" used in a text today. Truth be told, I'd never heard of it, either, until this article.