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

[eti]

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.

Why? What is “wrong” with saying “he called me” - not impressive enough?

People are so very easily brainwashed, and even more easily impressed with themselves and how “clever” they sound. It simply had to have originated from these ghastly Americans. <sarcasm but also true>

I’d like to reach out and smack them on the nose, hah!

This is probably one of the few intelligent things I’ve seen on that virus which calls itself “LinkedIn”: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141020052253-64875646-50-things-you-must-stop-saying-at-work

Please forgive me for referencing the great unwashed, aka “Quora”, but this ”discussion” sums up how I feel, well, most comments in it do: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-use-the-term-reach-out-when-they-mean-contact-People-use-it-to-simply-mean-contact-someone-you-either-dont-know-or-havent-talked-to-in-a-while

I’m sure a few have seen this before, but it still stands proud and true: https://youtu.be/om7O0MFkmpw

🤣

[Ed.Kloonk]

I got in trouble once for responding to a colleague's  "Hi Ed, just reaching out regarding your ..[forgot]"

I included in the reply  "You can reach around anytime"

Should have seen the stinkin' letter I got from the general manager.

[paul@yahrprobert.com]

Very good rant, reminds me of George Carlin.

[xrunner]

Thanks for reaching out to us about this. 

[Ed.Kloonk]

Thanks for reaching out to us about this. 

 

We've been trying to reach you about your car's extended warranty.

[eti]

Thanks for reaching out to us about this. 

Oh youuuu! You complete joker!

🤪

[eti]

I’m just astounded at how easily people fall into this way of talking; it’s almost as if people don’t stop and listen to the words that come out of their mouths.

[Ed.Kloonk]

I’m just astounded at how easily people fall into this way of talking; it’s almost as if people don’t stop and listen to the words that come out of their mouths.

On the contrary. I think they think they sound cool.

[eti]

I’m just astounded at how easily people fall into this way of talking; it’s almost as if people don’t stop and listen to the words that come out of their mouths.

On the contrary. I think they think they sound cool.

You’re thinking outside the box in a new paradigm of vertical thinking, leveraging your assets.

🥸

[KaneTW]

Don't care. I'll just mirror whatever language the person I'm talking to uses.

[eti]

Don't care. I'll just mirror whatever language the person I'm talking to uses.

Have you no shame? 🤪

That’s pretty silly. You may like to set a higher standard by steering the person toward a better vocabulary. It’s this sheer laziness that causes the propagation of such piffle in language.

[james_s]

There are some things people say that annoys me, but none of it is as annoying as the self appointed language police that rant about it. English is a nearly universal language and there are regional dialects with their own quirks and colloquialisms all over, I don't see what the big deal is.

[eti]

There are some things people say that annoys me, but none of it is as annoying as the self appointed language police that rant about it. English is a nearly universal language and there are regional dialects with their own quirks and colloquialisms all over, I don't see what the big deal is.

I didn’t expect you to see, neither will opinion of this daft linguistic subset, alter, based on your views.

You dislike what you broad-brush as “language police”, yet it seems the fact that you want to police thought and opinion, utterly escapes you. I have my views and they’re hardly offensive, so please, if you disagree then okay that’s nice, and a fond farewell I bid you.

[tszaboo]

Nah, this is the perfect language to use:
"Thank you for reaching out with this job offer, but the Junior Firmware programmer is not an interesting position for me."

I think they just carpet bomb everyone with these code monkey jobs.

[Benta]

A small comment on the topic title here:

"Contact" is not a verb, it's a noun.
Using "contacted them" is WORSE than "reaching out".

Just sayin'.

[TimFox]

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

[Benta]

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

You're right, I trusted  Nero Wolfe more than the web.   

[Zero999]

Don't care. I'll just mirror whatever language the person I'm talking to uses.

There's nothing wrong with that if you're in an informal situation, but it's better to stick to standard English, in a formal setting.

[Ground_Loop]

My exact sentiments. My wife works for Deloitte and Touché consulting. We make great sport of analyzing the underlying meaning of their ridiculously over jargoned correspondence.

[Alex Eisenhut]

I don't know, let's ask Johnny Cash

Take second best
Put me to the test
Things on your chest
You need to confess
I will deliver
You know i'm a forgiver
CONTACT and touch faith
CONTACT and touch faith

Nope.

[schmitt trigger]

My cat is meowing at me constantly.

I believe he is reaching out for food.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Very good rant, reminds me of George Carlin.

Geez. He was just here a minute ago.

[eti]

I don't know, let's ask Johnny Cash

Take second best
Put me to the test
Things on your chest
You need to confess
I will deliver
You know i'm a forgiver
CONTACT and touch faith
CONTACT and touch faith

Nope.

One isn't singing a country and western song to one's business contacts.

[eti]

My exact sentiments. My wife works for Deloitte and Touché consulting. We make great sport of analyzing the underlying meaning of their ridiculously over jargoned correspondence.

A little creative transposing of letters, and we get  "Toilette and Douche"

[Cerebus]

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.

As a transitive verb, the word is vague and self-important. Do not contact people; get in touch with them, look them up, phone them, find them, or meet 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.

[xrunner]

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.

In consideration of your statement, after a short time pondering all implications, I would have to assert and make known here, my complete agreement and endorsement of your claim.

[Cerebus]

He means "Me too." <- ex professional editor at work.

I once had a friend, a highly knowledgable barrister, who was the model of clarity when you sat down and chatted with him. We got him to write the legal column for the back pages of the magazine I was working on at the time. Despite it not being my section of the magazine, somehow muggins here ended up with the task of editing his column. I suspect that our chief subeditor fluttered her Spanish eyes at me (the rest of her was from Yorkshire) with a plea that she couldn't make head nor tail of it, and that he was my friend so it was my problem. Anyone who has encountered a Yorkshirewoman who has made up her mind, let alone one with a streak of Spanish temperament in her, will know why I quietly did as 'requested'. Never in my life have I had to pummel quite so many words that said nothing into something comprehensible while still trying to extract what he was actually trying to say.

There's something about putting words into writing that makes some people go crazy and say things that they never would if they were talking face to face with someone. Lawyers are one of the principal classes of culprits here, and for some reason so are junior admin staff. At least with lawyers they usually know what the words mean, but the number of emails I've had from minor functionaries who do things like use "confirm" ten times in an email without ever using it once to actually confirm something. When I encounter that particular misuse it seems to be being used in the hope that if you say something enough times together with the word "confirm" it will somehow magically have become true in the face and the teeth of the actual facts.

Obviously the worst offenders are the management types and the marketing types, but at least with them the interpretation or translation becomes easy - it almost always boils down to "I said nothing of substance" or "I know nothing".

[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.

Will we also be celebrating their equally useful neoarithmetisms?

If that ugly word become a neologism, and the new terms be equally useful, then another cause for celebration.

[eti]

All very interesting and all that, chaps, but it's still wrong. A tree is still a tree, no matter who looks at it and from what angle.

[bsfeechannel]

Now I am confused. Should I sing along "contact and take it"?

[bdunham7]

All very interesting and all that, chaps, but it's still wrong. A tree is still a tree, no matter who looks at it and from what angle.

Nah!  It's a 'single member forest'.  Or a 'houseplant', if you rearrange the typical construction of the meaning of the word.

[coppercone2]

careful with reaching because it can get you into trouble with HR and the law on a harassment claim

maybe the groping is more specific to sales I am not sure. I suggest you reach for your pockets sir

[tooki]

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.

”You are not wrong” has a specific meaning, and that meaning is not “you’re right!” 

Not sure what you mean about the others; they’re perfectly normal words.

[tooki]

My cat is meowing at me constantly.

I believe he is reaching out for food.

I once had a cat who would come and paw at me for stuff. Or if I was sleeping, walk across my face to get my attention. I think those definitely count as “reaching out”!

[JPortici]

Now I am confused. Should I sing along "contact and take it"?

This is the song i was thinking about. thanks for reaching out to my subconcious

[DiTBho]

People are so very easily brainwashed, and even more easily impressed with themselves and how “clever” they sound. It simply had to have originated from these ghastly Americans. <sarcasm but also true>

bias? 

[DiTBho]

(I agree with Quora.
Good points, great article)

[Cerebus]

My cat is meowing at me constantly.

I believe he is reaching out for food.

I once had a cat who would come and paw at me for stuff. Or if I was sleeping, walk across my face to get my attention. I think those definitely count as “reaching out”!

No, that counts as "Giving instructions to the staff", the difference between the interrogative or a request and the imperative. If I don't notice madam in front of me waiting to give me instructions she will put her paw onto my knee to get my attention. If I am not paying her attention within 500 ms she extends her claws lightly into my knee.

[Bassman59]

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.

In consideration of your statement, after a short time pondering all implications, I would have to assert and make known here, my complete agreement and endorsement of your claim.

Hey, I just got spam email that said exactly that!

[Bassman59]

Obviously the worst offenders are the management types and the marketing types, but at least with them the interpretation or translation becomes easy - it almost always boils down to "I said nothing of substance" or "I know nothing".

The Bard said it ages ago: "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

[Bassman59]

Now I am confused. Should I sing along "contact and take it"?

No, you should surrender to the dream police.

[Cerebus]

Obviously the worst offenders are the management types and the marketing types, but at least with them the interpretation or translation becomes easy - it almost always boils down to "I said nothing of substance" or "I know nothing".

The Bard said it ages ago: "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Well, they often make me want to clutch a dagger. 

[SiliconWizard]

Well, they say that only 10%-20% of communication is verbal, the rest being non-verbal (like body language, the way you speak, and so on...)

Now, in those 10%-20% of verbal, how much "content" matters in terms of communication? Because I guess the "wording" is still verbal communication. If we extend the above a bit, maybe it's the same proportion - meaning that only 10%-20% of the verbal part of communication is actual content, the rest being the wording.

If so, that would be only 1% to 4% of actual content in communication, the rest being noise. Does that sound right?

[TimNJ]

I think the emergence and prevalence of corporate-speak must somehow be related to:

1. A self-consciousness/doubt that (perhaps) your cubicle computer job doesn't really contribute much to society (even if it really does!) Imposter syndrome? Needing to prove it to yourself? "I studied hard in school, barely had a childhood, went to the best college, and now I work this cubicle computer job. It was all totally worth it!.....right??"

2. The fear of being "found out" by  others and the need to prove to others that your cubicle office job is in fact a valuable contribution to society

I think the modern corporate job is pretty "unnatural" in the sense of human evolution/biology etc. I'm totally unqualified to talk about this (apart from being a human), but surely there is some psychological effect of taking a species whose work, for 99% of its history, was tangible and hands-on, and making them send emails all day. I dunno; I feel we aren't wired for it, and so perhaps we have to over-compensate to make us feel better about it.

I think people tend to speak in these weird roundabout ways when they are not comfortable with whomever they are talking to. To me, it indicates that you, in some way, have your guard up.

Pragmatically, I've found that when I speak as naturally as possible, through email or in a meeting, this encourages other people to speak naturally too. Another way is to speak about your own shortcomings/failures in an equally natural way. Obviously we all mess up...everyone knows this, but in a corporate setting, the tendency seems to be to save face. Letting people know that you are human too encourages them to let their guard down and talk to you normally.

Recently, I listened to a discussion about the difference between the corporate and blue-collar worlds, and found it very intriguing. (For those unfamiliar with the term "blue collar", it basically just means "trade work", like carpenters, electricians, factory workers, etc.) The observation was that opinions in the blue-collar culture tend to be very blunt and out-in-the-open. If someone wrongs you (or vice versa), there may be a heated exchange, swear words, non-PC language, etc... but by the next day, it's almost like nothing happened..On the contrary, in the corporate world, this kind of behavior is "not professional", HR gets involved, and yada yada...Personal conflicts between two people are not allowed to happen in a "natural" way, and you have people boiling up with animosity, ready to explode.

As a reminder, I have no psychology degree, but that's how I see it!

[tooki]

Totally agree!

!

1. A self-consciousness/doubt that (perhaps) your cubicle computer job doesn't really contribute much to society (even if it really does!) Imposter syndrome? Needing to prove it to yourself? "I studied hard in school, barely had a childhood, went to the best college, and now I work this cubicle computer job. It was all totally worth it!.....right??"

2. The fear of being "found out" by  others and the need to prove to others that your cubicle office job is in fact a valuable contribution to society

I think the modern corporate job is pretty "unnatural" in the sense of human evolution/biology etc. I'm totally unqualified to talk about this (apart from being a human), but surely there is some psychological effect of taking a species whose work, for 99% of its history, was tangible and hands-on, and making them send emails all day. I dunno; I feel we aren't wired for it, and so perhaps we have to over-compensate to make us feel better about it.

I think people tend to speak in these weird roundabout ways when they are not comfortable with whomever they are talking to. To me, it indicates that you, in some way, have your guard up.

My observation is that the use of artificially complex speech has a direct, inversely proportional relationship to the actual skill and intelligence of the speaker. Someone who actually knows their shit doesn’t feel the need to couch it in fluff.

[thm_w]

I take it you've never seen the movie?

[bsfeechannel]

No, you should surrender to the dream police.

What is funny about this rendition is that the vocalist announces that the song starts with the keyboards. When he realizes the song actually starts with the drums, he briefly looks at the drummer with a damn-I-always-forget-that-drummers-are-musicians-too attitude, then proceeds to greet the keyboardist.

I think the emergence and prevalence of corporate-speak must somehow be related to:

The reason why corporations restrict the usage of words or even expressions is that the relationship between companies is ALWAYS formal. No matter what position you hold, you are a representative of that company. So your talk has to conform to a standard. Of course the formality can be relaxed in many contexts, but that doesn't mean a permanent license.

[Cerebus]

No, you should surrender to the dream police.

What is funny about this rendition is that the vocalist announces that the song starts with the keyboards. When he realizes the song actually starts with the drums, he briefly looks at the drummer with a damn-I-always-forget-that-drummers-are-musicians-too attitude, then proceeds to greet the keyboardist.

Easy mistake. Anyone could make it. Drummers, well... 

I think the emergence and prevalence of corporate-speak must somehow be related to:

The reason why corporations restrict the usage of words or even expressions is that the relationship between companies is ALWAYS formal. No matter what position you hold, you are a representative of that company. So your talk has to conform to a standard. Of course the formality can be relaxed in many contexts, but that doesn't mean a permanent license.

It's not a, possibly necessary, formality that is being complained of. It is empty buzzword loaded speech that is essentially meaningless.

Become essential to our customers by providing differentiated products and services to help them achieve their aspirations.

That is the mission statement for a very well known company. Can you tell what, if anything, they make? Can you tell what, if anything, that they do? Can you tell who, if anybody, are their customers? Does that in fact communicate anything that isn't implicit in a company existing, or is it just hot air, dressed up in buzzwords like "differentiated" and "aspirations",  expelled for the sake of saying something that didn't need to be said?

[TimNJ]

No, you should surrender to the dream police.

What is funny about this rendition is that the vocalist announces that the song starts with the keyboards. When he realizes the song actually starts with the drums, he briefly looks at the drummer with a damn-I-always-forget-that-drummers-are-musicians-too attitude, then proceeds to greet the keyboardist.

I think the emergence and prevalence of corporate-speak must somehow be related to:

The reason why corporations restrict the usage of words or even expressions is that the relationship between companies is ALWAYS formal. No matter what position you hold, you are a representative of that company. So your talk has to conform to a standard. Of course the formality can be relaxed in many contexts, but that doesn't mean a permanent license.

I'm not necessarily talking about talking "formally" vs talking in "slang". My communication with other companies is generally always formal, and I agree that it should be this way (for a number of reasons). One reason is that slang/informal speak can be interpreted differently by different people, especially those you don't have a close relationship with. So, clear, formal communication always makes sense in this context. When speaking with people within your company, you can adjust your formality based on how well you know the person, in my opinion.

But, my point is the "corporate-speak" ≠ "formal language". Speaking nonsense does not really help anyone, and probably just makes things more confusing for everyone.

[tooki]

Yeah, the issue is that modern “corporate” tries to avoid sounding formal, so instead it’s this contorted “casual” register. Google “microspeak” for some deal doozies: Microsoft is famous for coining just weeeeeird corporate speak.

But nothing, and I mean NOTHING, beats the insanity of Sephora’s corporate vocabulary. It is, frankly, freakish. The salesclerks, oops sorry, “cast members” are under strict orders to use their doubletalk lingo. The most memorable bit is that one cannot give a coworker (even a subordinate) “criticism” or “feedback”. No, you have to call it a “gift”.

“Hey tooki, I have a gift for you! You totally borked that last sale…”

[xrunner]

Yeah, the issue is that modern “corporate” tries to avoid sounding formal, so instead it’s this contorted “casual” register. Google “microspeak” for some deal doozies: Microsoft is famous for coining just weeeeeird corporate speak.

But nothing, and I mean NOTHING, beats the insanity of Sephora’s corporate vocabulary. It is, frankly, freakish. The salesclerks, oops sorry, “cast members” are under strict orders to use their doubletalk lingo. The most memorable bit is that one cannot give a coworker (even a subordinate) “criticism” or “feedback”. No, you have to call it a “gift”.

“Hey tooki, I have a gift for you! You totally borked that last sale…”

Is it OK to combine phrases? Such as "I would like to reach out to you with a gift"? 

[Sal Ammoniac]

English, like all languages, is ultimately defined by usage not diktat.

^^^This.

The British may not like Americanisms creeping into what they consider their language, but Americans, by far make up the largest group of speakers of the language. As an American who frequently visits the UK, I hear far more Americanisms in everyday speech in the UK than I hear British idioms in America.

This reminds me of the debate surrounding Pascal standards back in the 1980s. At the time, Turbo Pascal didn't adhere to the standard, but since Turbo Pascal users made up >95% of the users of the language, they couldn't care less.

[YurkshireLad]

"...going forward...."

How many other ways can you go? Can you travel back in time? I hate that phrase! Grrrr lol

[Sceptre]

'Reach out' has been used to refer to telephone calls in the US since the Bell System's "Reach Out and Touch Someone" ad campaign from the '70s:
https://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/bellsystem_ads-1.html
https://clickamericana.com/media/advertisements/reach-out-reach-out-and-touch-someone-1979-1982

Its popularity as corporate-speak has similar motivations - it sounds more warm and fuzzy.  Wouldn't you rather hear "I'm reaching out to let you know that you've been selected to participate in a resource action" than "I'm calling to tell you that you're fired"? 

[eti]

'Reach out' has been used to refer to telephone calls in the US since the Bell System's "Reach Out and Touch Someone" ad campaign from the '70s:
https://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/bellsystem_ads-1.html
https://clickamericana.com/media/advertisements/reach-out-reach-out-and-touch-someone-1979-1982

Its popularity as corporate-speak has similar motivations - it sounds more warm and fuzzy.  Wouldn't you rather hear "I'm reaching out to let you know that you've been selected to participate in a resource action" than "I'm calling to tell you that you're fired"? 

Yes, but the context in which that is said is not clinical and corporate hogwash, and was aimed towards *domestic customers* and comes across as  a warm, fuzzy way to encourage phone usage for contacting loved ones during the heyday of landlines.

Not quite the same as parroting variations on "reached out" et cetera as a one-size-fits-all buzzword in a clumsy attempt to "sound corporate and professional". 

[eti]

Anyone wishing to imply that American "English" is still valid English, might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

[TimFox]

Genetics, ethnicity, history, citizenship, subjecthood (or whatever you call it over there), food, and language are quite different concepts.

[Zero999]

Anyone wishing to imply that American "English" is still valid English, might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

In many respects, US English is more similar to what was spoken in Britain, back in the 1500s. British English has changed more since then, whist American English has remained truer to the original. Many words widely believed to be Americanisms are actually British, but have died out and been re-imported. Take the word gotten, the past tense of got, for example. It almost died out in Britain, during the Victorian era, becoming rare in the 20th centruary, has recently enjoyed a revival, thanks to US English.

Although I'm no fan of US English, to me it sounds less vulger and more educated, than some British working class dialects, although that might be because US media tends to use more upper class, standard American English.

[bsfeechannel]

But, my point is the "corporate-speak" ≠ "formal language". Speaking nonsense does not really help anyone, and probably just makes things more confusing for everyone.

I understand what you mean. And my point was exactly to show that the corporatespeak has its origins in an abuse of the formal language. Once you agree that you have to conform to certain rules, those very rules are then employed to include all sorts of ideologies.

So, to get rid of the nonsensical coroporatespeak you have to have in mind that you'll still have certain formal constraints.

[Sal Ammoniac]

Anyone wishing to imply that American "English" is still valid English, might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

Red herring. Citizenship has nothing to do with what language you speak. Besides, why would an American want British citizenship? 

If these descendants flew back to England would people in England be able to understand them? Sure they would. In fact, American idioms are much more common in the UK than British idioms are in the States.

[Cerebus]

Anyone wishing to imply that American "English" is still valid English, might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

Red herring. Citizenship has nothing to do with what language you speak. Besides, why would an American want British citizenship? 

If these descendants flew back to England would people in England be able to understand them? Sure they would. In fact, American idioms are much more common in the UK than British idioms are in the States.

No, no they would not. If the Americans arranged to meet them and said "Just look for a sedan with luggage sticking out of the trunk" the English would be looking for this:

[Bassman59]

No, you should surrender to the dream police.

What is funny about this rendition is that the vocalist announces that the song starts with the keyboards. When he realizes the song actually starts with the drums, he briefly looks at the drummer with a damn-I-always-forget-that-drummers-are-musicians-too attitude, then proceeds to greet the keyboardist.

Clearly this is why there is a rift between drummer Bun E. Carlos and the rest of the band.

[JohnG]

In NY, we had a governor who liked to reach out to people...

And for those who have the occasion to visit the NY capitol city now and then, a little fun!

[Sal Ammoniac]

No, no they would not. If the Americans arranged to meet them and said "Just look for a sedan with luggage sticking out of the trunk" the English would be looking for this:

And if a Brit over here said "Just look for a saloon with luggage sticking out of the boot" we'd direct them to either the nearest bar or podiatrist. 

[eti]

The excruciating pedants are out in force eh. 🤣

[KaneTW]

Takes one to know one.

[eti]

Takes one to know one.

Back atcha

[Sal Ammoniac]

[eti]

Weird to the non-English, but many languages appear odd to non-natives. So what.

[SiliconWizard]

There are homonyms in many languages. Actually, if there is one that doesn't have any, I'd be curious to know. Maybe chinese? Although I admit I know nothing about it.

[magic]

That's not even close to the top reasons.

The first thing is that written English is not really phonetic. Same letters, same pairs of letters, even same sub-words are pronounced/written differently depending on context.
Then is the bizarre pronunciation of all 'i's and 'y's in obvious loanwords which sound similar in continental languages.
16 tenses, gotta be kidding me.
Lack of singular pronouns besides "I", apparently

[tooki]

Anyone wishing to imply that American "English" is still valid English, might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

Ah, the classic rant of an uninformed British snob.

The fact that we can understand each other without difficulty already shows that we are using the same language. We speak different dialects, but the fact that we have mutual intelligibility shows that they’re not different languages.

There once was a language called “English”, which was then carried to multiple faraway lands. In each of those and in the mother country, this English continued to evolve, such that a) the dialects grew farther apart from each other, and b) the dialects, including in the mother country, evolved away from the mutual ancestral form. (And indeed, historical linguists have shown that British English changed more than American English. Both changed, but American English changed less.)

In other words, your British English is at minimum as far removed from the “original” English as my American English is. But the fact we are having this discussion in English means they’re both the same language, and its name is “English”.


What I find curious is how fragile the British psyche must be, given how so many Brits take every opportunity they can to bash on American English (and American things in general).

[Monkeh]

What I find curious is how fragile the British psyche must be, given how so many Brits take every opportunity they can to bash on American English (and American things in general).

Perhaps Americans just don't understand the concept of a good ribbing.

Not that eti's any less of a ranty snob.

[TimFox]

A thought-experiment on the use of "English" as the name of a language:
1.  What language was spoken in Massachusetts in 1765 (shortly before the War of Independence)?
2.  What language was spoken in Massachusetts in 1799 (shortly after the US Constitution)?
3.  What is the difference between these two languages?

[tooki]

I’ll see your listicle and raise it a poem.

[tooki]

What I find curious is how fragile the British psyche must be, given how so many Brits take every opportunity they can to bash on American English (and American things in general).

Perhaps Americans just don't understand the concept of a good ribbing.

Not that eti's any less of a ranty snob.

Oh, we do. I’m not even counting those. It truly does shock (and disappoint) me how often it happens in earnest.

[bsfeechannel]

That's not even close to the top reasons.

The first thing is that written English is not really phonetic. Same letters, same pairs of letters, even same sub-words are pronounced/written differently depending on context.
Then is the bizarre pronunciation of all 'i's and 'y's in obvious loanwords which sound similar in continental languages.
16 tenses, gotta be kidding me.
Lack of singular pronouns besides "I", apparently

I've studied a bunch of languages and English is just as "weird" as any other language. The inconsistency of its spelling has historical reasons. There was never a regulating body of writers and academics to establish, but specially to update the spelling of the language as its pronunciation evolved, like you find in other languages.

Take the word night, for instance. It was pronounced the same as the German word nicht, somewhere in the past. But as its pronunciation evolved to [neit], and then [nait], no one cared to update it. The k in know was pronounced in the days of yore, but now that it is silent, people still write it because tradition.

There were attempts at reforming the English orthography most notably by guys like Noah Webster, the one of the Webster's Dictionary, however. But to no avail. Au contraire, his influence resulted in differences between American and British spellings, such as color/colour, center/centre, etc, adding even more confusion to the chaos.

[themadhippy]

Bloody septics claiming to have invented english,just like they claimed to have invented the electric lamp,the computer , friendly fire  and 101 other things that us brits done first.

[TimFox]

The Roman alphabet is an efficient code for spelling Latin, and was later applied to other European languages with different codings, sometimes requiring extra diacritical marks.  English inherited inconsistent spellings from words adopted from disparate sources.  Artificial spelling rules, such as the Hepburn Romaji romanization of the Japanese spoken language, can be efficient but radical changes in extant orthography with the same character set are highly unlikely.

[Stray Electron]

   might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

   What's your point?  AFIK, the same applies whether the descendants were American or not; or if the originating country was England or any other country.

   I'm not aware of any country that would allow immigration or citizenship based solely on someone's far removed ancestry.

[tooki]

Bloody septics claiming to have invented english,just like they claimed to have invented the electric lamp,the computer , friendly fire  and 101 other things that us brits done first.

The fact you think Americans claim to have invented all those things doesn’t mean we actually claimed it. (Not to mention that an individual’s false understanding doesn’t mean the entire country has it wrong.)

Not that anyone has ever claimed Americans “invented” English. For starters, it wasn’t invented by anyone, since natural languages evolve… naturally. Even if we use the word “invent” lazily to mean “created by any method, intentional or not”, still nobody would claim Americans invented it. We did, however, continue to use it as our native language.


And “septics”? ”Septic” has to do with infection. You probably meant to to write “sceptics” (“skeptics” in American orthography). But if anyone is denying the reality of how modern English came to be, and what it means to even be the English language, it’s the Brits who attack American English and pretend the UK has a monopoly on the English language.

[Cerebus]

What I find curious is how fragile the British psyche must be, given how so many Brits take every opportunity they can to bash on American English (and American things in general).

That has nothing to do with the English, it's to do with a certain type of American who cannot resist telling everybody in the world, at every opportunity, that everything American is bigger, better, any positive superlative you like, than everything else in the world.You know the type, that cannot resist telling the English, the French, and anyone else that was involved, that "we saved your butts for you in WWII" conveniently forgetting that they were missing for the first half of the match. It's a reaction to that certain type of American. And it has nothing to do with the English, everybody in the world hates that kind of guy/gal and has it in for them. It only sticks out because if it was "that certain type of Bulgarian" nobody would notice.

It sticks out with the English and "English" because (1) the English character traditionally loathes a loudmouth and thinks they "need taking down a peg or two", (2) the language is called English and, rightly or wrongly, that lends a certain proprietorial air, (3) it's an easy target when dealing with the aforementioned type of loudmouth becuase, let's admit it, to that certain type of American syntax and semantics are the names of some villages in France.

[TimFox]

And so, we see that “a certain type of American” and “a certain type of Englishman” are both jerks.  The rest of us can get along.

[tooki]

   might like to consider this for a second: if part of an English family emigrated to America in the 1800s, then years later, their descendants flew back to England, from America, and demanded instant English citizenship, can you see how that would turn out?

"But my great great grandfather was English, so I'm entitled, and technically I'm almost English by ancestry"

Yeah? NO.

   What's your point?  AFIK, the same applies whether the descendants were American or not; or if the originating country was England or any other country.

   I'm not aware of any country that would allow immigration or citizenship based solely on someone's far removed ancestry.

Depends on how far removed “far” is! Italy, for example, has a quite generous rule that theoretically goes back indefinitely: https://www.esteri.it/mae/en/servizi/stranieri/cittadinanza_0.html

[tooki]

What I find curious is how fragile the British psyche must be, given how so many Brits take every opportunity they can to bash on American English (and American things in general).

That has nothing to do with the English, it's to do with a certain type of American who cannot resist telling everybody in the world, at every opportunity, that everything American is bigger, better, any positive superlative you like, than everything else in the world.You know the type, that cannot resist telling the English, the French, and anyone else that was involved, that "we saved your butts for you in WWII" conveniently forgetting that they were missing for the first half of the match. It's a reaction to that certain type of American. And it has nothing to do with the English, everybody in the world hates that kind of guy/gal and has it in for them. It only sticks out because if it was "that certain type of Bulgarian" nobody would notice.

It sticks out with the English and "English" because (1) the English character traditionally loathes a loudmouth and thinks they "need taking down a peg or two", (2) the language is called English and, rightly or wrongly, that lends a certain proprietorial air, (3) it's an easy target when dealing with the aforementioned type of loudmouth becuase, let's admit it, to that certain type of American syntax and semantics are the names of some villages in France.

Believe me, I know and detest that “certain type of American” as much as you do! (They’re the ones who’ve called me “euro trash” and accuse me of not being a “patriot” because I won’t kowtow to their indiscriminate, uninformed belief in the USA being #1 in all things past, present, and future.)

However, the British ragging on American English sadly has precious little to do with that, as it’s brought up regularly in the total absence of any “certain type of Americans”. Literally just encountering a (perceived) Americanism is can be enough to trigger an outburst.

I find it amusing that the British worry about boorish Americans, when meanwhile, the rest of Europe worries about boorish Brits!

Things would be so much nicer if the British would accept that the US and the UK are peas in a pod, that we are far more alike than we are different. Alas, the deference and admiration most Americans have for the UK is most decidedly not reciprocated.

[jmh]

'reaching out' was one, albeit very minor reason that I retired earlier than I had intended a few years ago. That, and other phrases came across as poison from marketing and dragged IT in. Well, that and enforced ITILisation, along with all those ITIL words and phrases and ways to abuse perfectly functioning processes. In the end we techies were told that we were not to talk to our users, sorry, customers, contact being via the helpdesk where all staff were presumably well versed in the art of reaching out.

One other rather daft phrase I keep hearing is someone explaining a situation by saying they are 'not lying when they say ...' - what, they usually do lie?

[Cerebus]

One other rather daft phrase I keep hearing is someone explaining a situation by saying they are 'not lying when they say ...' - what, they usually do lie?

You're on a hiding to nothing there. That construction is known as iitotes and has probably been around as long as there has been language. The Illiad has litotes in it.

[themadhippy]

And “septics”? ”Septic” has to do with infection.

Nope.its an ancient form of old english that means american as in septic tank-yank

[TimFox]

That was English before the invention of punctuation?

[Cerebus]

And “septics”? ”Septic” has to do with infection.

Nope.its an ancient form of old english that means american as in septic tank-yank

Oi! Less of the "Old English" thank you. That's proper pukka modern English, as what's spoke on my manor. In the words of one of the pair of modern poets of East London, Charles Hodges and David Peacock: "Gertcha, cowson".

[TimFox]

“Old English” is a technical term for the language before the Norman Conquest.  It was followed by “Middle English” (e.g., Chaucer and Malory), “Early Modern English” (e.g., Shakespeare and the King James Bible translation), and “Modern English”.
I remember a local academic making fun of a suburban high-school teacher who was proud of teaching Shakespeare in “Old English”.  The academic thought that that would require a scholar like J R R Tolkien to do properly.

[Cerebus]

Erm, it's pretty obvious from context that he was referring to a contemporary but traditional from of slang (London rhyming slang) as "Old English" not as a technically correct appellation, but as a form of humour. 

[Sal Ammoniac]

What's the etymology of Pommy Bastard? Anyone know?

[dave j]

What's the etymology of Pommy Bastard? Anyone know?

Pommy most popularly seems to be related to rhyming immigrant with pomegranate. Bastard is just from the Aussie habit of robust language use - they have a product called Start Ya Bastard for example.

From the OED:

Pommy (_____), n. (a.) Austral. and N.Z. colloq. Also Pommie and with lower-case initial.
[Origin obscure.]
A. n. A derogatory term for an immigrant from the United Kingdom; an Englishman or Englishwoman, a Briton.
B. attrib. or as adj. Of or pertaining to a Pommy; British, English, spec. (often as a term of affectionate abuse) in Pommy bastard. Cf. Pom2.
The most widely held derivation of this term, for which, however, there is no firm evidence, is that which connects it with pomegranate (see quots. 1923, 1963). A discussion of this and of other theories may be found in W. S. Ramson Australian English (1966) 63.
1915 in B. Gammage Broken Years (1974) 86 We call the Regulars–Indians and Australians–‘British’–but Pommies are nondescript.
1916 in Ibid. 240 They’re only a b— lot of Pommie Jackeroos and just as hopeless.
1916 Anzac Bk. 31 A Pommy can’t go wrong out there if he isn’t too lazy to work.
1920 D. O’Reilly in Murdoch & Drake-Brockman Austral. Short Stories (1951) 144 The ‘Pommy’ parson made good, as a good man always will.
1923 D. H. Lawrence Kangaroo vii. 162 Pommy is supposed to be short for pomegranate. Pomegranate, pronounced invariably pommygranate, is a near enough rhyme to immigrant, in a naturally rhyming country. Furthermore, immigrants are known in their first months, before their blood ‘thins down’, by their round and ruddy cheeks. So we are told.

[VK3DRB]

Office speak is full of silly phrases.

Two come to mind:

1. Some years ago, one extremely ambitious egocentric manager at IBM would often say "Show me the metrics!" and "Let's take it offline" etc, etc.

2. A more recent one is "The takeaways from the meeting are..." In Australia, "takeaway" has the same meaning as "to go", eg: you buy a pizza in a shop and take it home to eat. A CFO I know overused this word a lot and once asked "What are today's takeaways?" to all at a meeting. I answered "A dollar's worth of chips, two dim sims and one potato cake."
 

[xrunner]

Don't forget the unacceptable use of the "S" word now in any technical talk too.

[Ed.Kloonk]

I wonder if hiring someone to 'whip the crew into shape' is off the table.

[xrunner]

I wonder if hiring someone to 'whip the crew into shape' is off the table.

Reminds me of the old saying "The beatings will continue until moral improves" 

[Ed.Kloonk]

I wonder if hiring someone to 'whip the crew into shape' is off the table.

Reminds me of the old saying "The beatings will continue until moral improves" 

Song from 50 years ago. " You'll never break my spirit, even when my body's black and blue"

[eti]

Don't forget the unacceptable use of the "S" word now in any technical talk too.

In some ridiculously liberal area of muuuurica, I heard they'd banned the term "manhole" as it was sexist, and renamed it "maintenance access cover"

😏🤣
Murrrrrrica. Probably California.

[PlainName]

I just read this article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/opinion/doctor-patient-death-truth.html

where the author says:

In the most generous version of that night, my goal was to give my patient the information he needed so that he could reach out to those he loved, to say whatever he would want to say with the knowledge that his time was short.

I think "reach out" was exactly what was meant and quite appropriate. This piece made me realise that it could be us at fault: we reach out and then contact someone, or reach out to contact them.

[eti]