Word Crimes
As a writer and as a living person who uses language, I’m super sensitive to word usage. Probably overly sensitive. I believe that at a certain point, you should have the tools to express yourself meaningfully and correctly. So, when I read something that looks like chewed-up and spit-out words rather than thinking and communicating, my nose twitches, and I get a little pissed off. I'm not even talking about the “their, there, they’re” or the dreaded “your, you’re” stuff; I’m talking about words and phrases that people intentionally pick out to use and then proceed to butcher the context and meaning.
Trust me, I’m not one of those trolls who will nitpick your hastily made Instagram post that was probably corrected by an autocorrect that, despite the best intentions, is almost always ducking wrong. I’m talking about ignorance of how words work that will make you look stupid. A few examples.
Parody and Parity
Do you know these words? Do you know the difference? In the last two weeks, I’ve seen these two words mismatched. In both cases, the writer meant to use “parity” and instead used “parody.” They’re not the same. Parity is used to describe two things that are equal, while parody is used to describe a mocking or imitation of something. See the difference? They can’t be used interchangeably, obviously.
Gorilla and Guerrilla
I’m willing to bet everyone knows what a gorilla is. But you don’t use that word in the phrase “guerrilla marketing” or “guerrilla warfare.” Guerilla is used to describe irregular methods used to achieve a goal. The origin of the word guerrilla is actually Spanish, meaning “little war.” So, just imagine yourself taking on a tiny little war as you’re writing a marketing strategy or plan of action. Not a huge hairy animal. Get it?
Should of and Should Have
See also: could have, would have, might have, etc. For some reason, this one infuriates me the most. When spoken, “should have” and “should of” are almost identical, that part I get. But when it comes to writing this phrase, it should send off red flags all over the place. “Should have” is a reflective phrase referring to an action and results that are favorable over current conditions; “I should have stayed in school” or “I should have worn a coat.” I will concede that “should’ve” is an acceptable contraction.
“Should of” is a nonsense phrase and makes you look stupid. I’m willing to wager that if we keep using ‘should of’ in 100 years, the lexicon may accepted it, and we’ll all look dumber for it.
So, What’s Your Point?
You’re probably thinking “meh, so what, I’m not some high falutin’ author or whatever so it doesn’t matter” or “they’ll know what I mean.” But it does matter. When I read these word crimes out in the real world, I can think of nothing else but how that person probably doesn’t know what they’re talking about. The author heard a word, liked it, and now wants to sound all smarty pants. I can picture them hearing the word for the first time, nodding their head as they feign understanding, looking forward to using it at the very next opportunity. Besides that, it is just plain lazy.
The lesson? Spoken and written language can differ greatly. If you’re unsure, look it up—use your AI assistant or ask someone. Learning the difference could help you sound smarter. Do you know how many times I have to look something up because I thought I knew what I was doing but I really don’t? A lot. I regularly look things up because I often realize I don’t know what something means. I’m still trying to figure out “port manteau.”
Want a quick guide to avoid word crimes? Let me know.