No, you didn’t “reach out”, you CONTACTED them

[rsjsouza]

There's a lot of other things that annoy me much more in "modernspeak", such as "you are not wrong", "proactive", "problematic", "misspoke", "systemic", etc.

Some are normal terms, but their recent over use by grifters and weasels ruined many of these for me.

[Alex Eisenhut]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

[Cerebus]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

No, if you "wrote them" that would imply they were either a piece of literary fiction or computer software - those are the only ways that I can imagine one could have "written" a person, either as a character, or as a simulation (Like the bot that ends all its 'questions' on here with "I am sure you must agree"). I believe you mean "wrote to them". 

[eti]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

No, if you "wrote them" that would imply they were either a piece of literary fiction or computer software - those are the only ways that I can imagine one could have "written" a person, either as a character, or as a simulation (Like the bot that ends all its 'questions' on here with "I am sure you must agree"). I believe you mean "wrote to them". 

Precisely. The world has become polluted by American dumb dumb language.

[eti]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

What you call “pedantry” is what we English term as “correct English”. Since it is our language, and we conceived it, we get to say what is correct or incorrect, end of story.

Americans don’t use English, they use Americanese, which is a very vague approximated derivative - a junk food version of it.

[Cerebus]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

No, if you "wrote them" that would imply they were either a piece of literary fiction or computer software - those are the only ways that I can imagine one could have "written" a person, either as a character, or as a simulation (Like the bot that ends all its 'questions' on here with "I am sure you must agree"). I believe you mean "wrote to them". 

Precisely. The world has become polluted by American dumb dumb language.

I don't think you grasp the difference between having a bit of fun with someone - Alex was being wryly pedantic, so I was wryly pendantic back - and downright insulting them. Alex is a Canadian, eh. Speaking as if he was American is tantamount to a declaration of war. 

Oh, and you're probably about to be visited by the wrath of he-who-shall-not-be-named (he studied linguistics, don'tcha know), who as an American ex-patriate has the expat's fervour for all things related to the place he doesn't want to live any more, and takes great exception to any claims that English is the language of the English and just perhaps they have first dibs on it. Expect tedious arguments from authority about vowel shifts and the like.

As far as I can tell the only bloke wot still speaks the Queen's English proper like is me innit, and 'er up in the Palace obviously. Goes wivout sayin' that bit does, don' it?

[TimFox]

Of course, you didn't "contact" anyone either since you didn't literally touch them. You wrote them.
I mean if you're going to electrodacus levels of pedantry.

No, if you "wrote them" that would imply they were either a piece of literary fiction or computer software - those are the only ways that I can imagine one could have "written" a person, either as a character, or as a simulation (Like the bot that ends all its 'questions' on here with "I am sure you must agree"). I believe you mean "wrote to them". 

"Wrote to them" is correct.  However, Oxford accepts "wrote them" as acceptable North American usage.  For non-silly discussions of our shared language around the world, please consult the Oxford Companion to the English Language  https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199661282.001.0001/acref-9780199661282

[magic]

The same cancer is found all over the world. Here, everybody in Big Self-Important Business™ insists on using (usually half-polonized/bastardized) English words for every stupid little thing which has a perfectly adequate Polish name. It makes them sound Modern and International, apparently.

What you call “pedantry” is what we English term as “correct English”. Since it is our language, and we conceived it, we get to say what is correct or incorrect, end of story.

Americans don’t use English, they use Americanese, which is a very vague approximated derivative - a junk food version of it.

Everybody who identifies as an English speaker is an equally valid English speaker

[eti]

The same cancer is found all over the world. Here, everybody in Big Self-Important Business™ insists on using (usually half-polonized/bastardized) English words for every stupid little thing which has a perfectly adequate Polish name. It makes them sound Modern and International, apparently.

What you call “pedantry” is what we English term as “correct English”. Since it is our language, and we conceived it, we get to say what is correct or incorrect, end of story.

Americans don’t use English, they use Americanese, which is a very vague approximated derivative - a junk food version of it.

Everybody who identifies as an English speaker is an equally valid English speaker

If you “identify” as a horse or not, doesn’t make you one.

[magic]

In America, you don't get to tell people who or what they are

[Simon]

I'm with eti, returning to live in the UK from Italy after 14 years was quite the culture shock. I never ever use the words "reach out" unless I mean the physical act of doing so.

My take is that it is a race to the top in office jargon used by people aware of how insignificant in a physical sense their work is trying to create more of a physical sounding presence of what they do to increase their value over other seemingly non result producing work. This also expands into how people talk about any non physical yet possibly significant action.

It does get boring after a while.

[eti]

In America, you don't get to tell people who or what they are

#1 Er what?
#2 I’m not in America
#3 GOTO 1


What does this have to do with <choose your favourite country>? Corporate dullard talk is a joke, and they don’t even hear themselves doing it. Yes it’s not the sky falling in, and not the end of the world, but it’s an assault on the minds of those hearing it.

[Zero999]

In America, you don't get to tell people who or what they are

#1 Er what?
#2 I’m not in America
#3 GOTO 1


What does this have to do with <choose your favourite country>? Corporate dullard talk is a joke, and they don’t even hear themselves doing it. Yes it’s not the sky falling in, and not the end of the world, but it’s an assault on the minds of those hearing it.

Unfortunately it's spreading over here.

Extremist ideas such as critical gender theory are taking over the western world. Only a few years ago, I would have been kicked out of a female changing room and my name might've been added to the sex offenders register, but now I can say I'm a woman, even though I'm blatantly male. I'm free to sit stark bollock naked, in a female changing room, surrounded by some underage girls, if I went during school time.

I was recently triggered by a woman at work, listing her pronouns at the end of an email. It took some restraint not to write a sarcastic response. The sad thing is she's pretty. It's obvious by her name and appearance she's a her. I was disappointed to lean, she's a social justice warrior. It's odd how some of the more masculine looking women, who could pass for men, if they dressed right, don't feel the need to state their pronouns.

[eti]

In America, you don't get to tell people who or what they are

#1 Er what?
#2 I’m not in America
#3 GOTO 1


What does this have to do with <choose your favourite country>? Corporate dullard talk is a joke, and they don’t even hear themselves doing it. Yes it’s not the sky falling in, and not the end of the world, but it’s an assault on the minds of those hearing it.

Unfortunately it's spreading over here.

Extremist ideas such as critical gender theory are taking over the western world. Only a few years ago, I would have been kicked out of a female changing room and my name might've been added to the sex offenders register, but now I can say I'm a woman, even though I'm blatantly male. I'm free to sit stark bollock naked, in a female changing room, surrounded by some underage girls, if I went during school time.

I was recently triggered by a woman at work, listing her pronouns at the end of an email. It took some restraint not to write a sarcastic response. The sad thing is she's pretty. It's obvious by her name and appearance she's a her. I was disappointed to lean, she's a social justice warrior. It's odd how some of the more masculine looking women, who could pass for men, if they dressed right, don't feel the need to state their pronouns.

It’s a very sad state of affairs. This is all prophecied in the Bible, it’s no surprise to those who believe in Christ Jesus.

I watched this earlier - I had to to inform myself. I love my American cousins but am blessed not to be subjected to this nonsense:

https://youtu.be/t8WllTJ8YGk

[Ed.Kloonk]

As far back as the '60s.

Reach out. (I'll be there).

[Simon]

It’s a very sad state of affairs. This is all prophecied in the Bible, it’s no surprise to those who believe in Christ Jesus.

I watched this earlier - I had to to inform myself. I love my American cousins but am blessed not to be subjected to this nonsense:

https://youtu.be/t8WllTJ8YGk

I'm not quite sure how it was predicted in the bible. It seems to bang on about terrible things to come with nothing specific, it's all down to interpretation. Depending on your outlook things are either getting bad or worse and you can then apply the narrative you prefer.

[Simon]

As far back as the '60s.

Reach out. (I'll be there).

Slightly different context to business emails.

[xrunner]

What’s with this modern idiocy of having to force every simple, everyday action to make it sound like you’ve just graduated from some Dilbert school of business?

You didn’t “reach out” to them, nor did they “reach out” to you - you phoned/emailed/wrote to them. It shows how easily people are swept up by the waves of language and carried along by them. I despise these corporate bollocks phrases, because it’s abundantly clear that the motive behind using them is an act of vanity, and trying to “fit in” with the other lot.

Language is full of useless sayings. For example, I'm a ham. When the other person gets tired if talking to you - maybe he/she is bored, has something to do, etc., they say

"Well I'm going to let you go now ..."

Huh? How can they let me go? I didn't say I wanted to go anywhere, and they have no right to control when I go anywhere. But they say "I'm going to let you go". What they should say is "I'm going to let myself go, because it's me that wants to go.

 

Then when people call you they say "How are you today?" They do not want to know how you are, they just want to get the conversation started. Just tell them you feel terrible. They will not want to deal with that conversation.

[dave j]

In English, “contact” can be a noun or a verb:  check any dictionary.

"Any" dictionary?

CO'NTACT.
n.s. [contactus, Latin.]

Touch; close union; juncture of one body to another.

No verb. 

Actually I suspect the "verbing" of contact is relatively recent in general usage, probably some time during the 20th century. Maybe earlier in American usage  - if ever there was a country that loved to turn nouns into verbs it's North America. I'd need a few generations of paper dictionaries to prove when it became accepted.  To my ear the formulation "get in touch with" or "get in contact with" is natural sounding, contact as a verb less so. For what it's worth Strunk and White still condemn using contact as a verb, and I suspect it would cause Fowler apoplexy.

The full Oxford English Dictionary has that particular usage of contact as being a US colloquialism from the 1920s.

3. trans. To get into contact or in touch with (a person). orig. U.S. colloq.
1927 Spectator 6 Aug. 212/2 Dreiser should not be allowed to corrupt his language by writing ‘anything that Clyde had personally contacted here’.
1929 L. F. Carr America Challenged 61 Mr. Dickey contacted every family in three representative agricultural counties.
1935 A. P. Herbert What a Word! 100 A charming lady in the publicity business shocked me when we parted by saying ‘It has been such fun contacting you.’
1936 Wodehouse Laughing Gas ix. 95 The prospect whom I was planning to contact, as they call it in America, was leaning back in the arm-chair.
1938 Manch. Guardian Weekly 19 Aug. 148/1 Will you please retain your ticket until you have contacted Mr. —.
1940 Times Weekly 27 Nov. 1/4 (Advt.), Factory representatives in most parts of world. Contact your local trader.
1951 Good Housek. Home Encycl. 85/1 See that everyone in the household knows how to contact the nearest Fire Service, by telephone if possible.

English, like all languages, is ultimately defined by usage not diktat. If the Académie Française can't stop Anglicisms from being adopted into French, Strunk and White have no chance stopping Americans from verbing nouns.

[TimFox]

In 2027 (just five years from now), we can celebrate the useful neologism where the verb form of "contact" was added to the language, thanks to Americans.

[Cerebus]

In 2027 (just five years from now), we can celebrate the useful neologism where the verb form of "contact" was added to the language, thanks to Americans.

Will we also be celebrating their equally useful neoarithmetisms?

[SpecialK]

Does anybody else hate when a meeting ends early and the host says "I will give you back 45(or however long) minutes of your time"?  I always comment "woo hoo I'm going hom early!"

I mean really if a meeting was scheduled for an hour but goes 10 minutes, can't they just admit that a meeting wasn't needed and this was a 10 minute waste of time?  Not to mention it blocked me from scheduling something else tht was potentilly more important.

[dave j]

Does anybody else hate when a meeting ends early and the host says "I will give you back 45(or however long) minutes of your time"?  I always comment "woo hoo I'm going hom early!"

I mean really if a meeting was scheduled for an hour but goes 10 minutes, can't they just admit that a meeting wasn't needed and this was a 10 minute waste of time?  Not to mention it blocked me from scheduling something else tht was potentilly more important.

It also blocked someone else from inviting you to a meeting that might have wasted a whole hour. At least this way you got 50 minutes to use as you wished.

[themadhippy]

This is all prophecied in the Bible, it’s no surprise to those who believe in Christ Jesus.

haven't read that particular fairy tail ,perhaps you can educate us on what she has to say

[SiliconWizard]

It's just that the less we have to say, and the "fancier" it needs to sound, so we can look smart and interesting while saying almost nothing.