I’ve built my own little catalog of commonly misused words over the course of a few years. These are the words that reliably make me wince, the ones I notice every single time they’re used incorrectly.

Some of them are grotesque, though some can make me laugh.

You may have your own kind of list like this. Certain words that, once they’re on your radar, you can’t not notice. They jump out at you mid-sentence and quietly ruin your flow. So now I’m curious … what’s on your list?

SPIEL: Turns out, I’ve had this one backwards. I always thought pronouncing it shpiel was wrong, but it’s actually correct. The word comes from Yiddish, and even though it’s spelled spiel, it’s meant to be pronounced shpiel.

• Example: “He gave a long shpiel about his investment strategy.”

FROU-FROU, NOT FOO-FOO: Working in the hospitality industry, I hear this tons. “I don’t like foo-foo drinks” is what they’ll say. Definition: fancy, showy, or frilly ornamentation. I never correct them.

• Example: “That restaurant’s decor is a little too frou-frou for my taste.”

Recurring, NOT Reoccurring: You can use the word “reoccurring,” but only when you’re speaking of something that happens again, but not on a regular basis.

• Example: “There’s a likely chance storms will reoccur today.”
  Recur is when something happens at regular intervals.
• Example: “My recurring dream came back last night.”

MYRIAD: This word simply means “many.”

Even in otherwise polished, professional articles, myriad is often made more complicated than it actually is.

• Incorrect: There was a myriad of options.
• Correct: There were myriad options.
• Example: “She has myriad reasons for loving that city.”

REAL-TOR, NOT REAL-A-TOR: Very few people use the correct one here, sometimes not even the realtor themselves. It’s a trademark name.

• Example: “I spoke to my real-tor about listing the house.”

IRREGARDLESS: In dictionaries this is listed as “nonstandard” or “incorrect” usage. Regardless means “without regard.” So, when you say irregardless, what you’re really saying is: without without (twice) regard.

• Incorrect: “Irregardless of the weather, we’ll still go hiking.”
• Correct: “Regardless of the weather, we’ll still go hiking.”

JIBE, NOT JIVE: This is another one the dictionary lists, though considers non-standard. It’s become so common over the years that it’s starting to be looked at as acceptable.

• Incorrect: That story doesn’t jive with me.
• Correct: That story doesn’t jibe with me.
• Example: “His version of events just doesn’t jibe with the evidence.”

LITERALLY: This one drives me nuts. People often use “literally” for emphasis, when they mean “figuratively.”

• Literally means something actually happened, exactly as stated.
• Figuratively means something is being expressed as a figure of speech or exaggeration — not actually true.
• Incorrect: I literally died laughing. (You didn’t actually die.)
• Correct: I figuratively died laughing. (You’re exaggerating for effect.)
• Example: “She was so embarrassed, she literally wanted to crawl under the table.” (Better: figuratively wanted to crawl.)

BEMUSED vs. AMUSED: Bemused means confused or bewildered, not entertained.

• Incorrect: I was bemused by the comedian.
• Correct: I was amused by the comedian.
• Example: “He looked bemused when we explained the rules.”

NAUSEOUS vs. NAUSEATED: Nauseous means causing nausea, while nauseated means feeling nausea.

• Incorrect: I felt nauseous after the ride.
• Correct: I felt nauseated after the ride.
• Example: “The smell of the paint made me nauseated.”

“SUPPOSED,” NOT “SUPPOSABLY” (Also Correct: “Supposedly”)

This mistake shows up a lot in casual conversation. “Supposably” is not a word. The correct phrase is “supposed to,” and it’s used for plans, expectations, or obligations.

• Incorrect: I’m supposably meeting her later.
• Correct: I’m supposed to meet her later.
• Example: You’re supposed to finish your homework before dinner.

“Supposedly” is a real word, but it has a different meaning: it indicates something that people say or believe, but might not be true.

• Example: She’s supposedly the best singer in the class.
• Example: The movie is supposedly very funny.

FLAMMABLE vs. INFLAMMABLE

Ironically, “flammable” and “inflammable” mean the same thing: easily set on fire.

The word “inflammable” can be confusing because people sometimes assume the “in-” prefix means “not,” but in this case, it doesn’t.

Example:

• Keep all flammable liquids away from the stove.
• Keep all inflammable liquids away from the stove. (Means the same thing, but “flammable” is safer for clarity.)

I COULD CARE LESS vs. I COULDN’T CARE LESS: Saying “I could care less” implies you do care at least a little, which is the opposite of what people mean.

• Incorrect: I could care less about that show.
• Correct: I couldn’t care less about that show.

DON’T vs. DOESN’T: (Yes, This Is Still a Problem)

• Don’t = I, you, we, they → I don’t get it.
• Doesn’t = he, she, it → She doesn’t get it.

If you say “he don’t,” “she don’t,” or “it don’t,” somewhere an English teacher just died a little. Don’t do it. Ever.

The post One Spiel on Misused Words appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.

In grade school we are all taught our A, B, C’s, but rarely were we ever tested on our Alfa, Beta, Charlie’s. If you’ve ever been on a phone call having to spell out your name or the email address you created in 8th grade, odds are you had to spell phonetically. When ‘A as in Adam’ and ‘B as in boy’ leave your lips, you’ve just used your own, personal phonetic alphabet. In an increasingly loud world, where the three-second video clip is king and everyone and everything is vying for attention, slowing down and conveying a message clearly us a necessity. Over 100 years ago, a new alphabet was created to help with this very issue – though referenced in pop culture and every day parlance, its inception was mainly to support military operations and aviation. Saying that life is a battlefield, (not love: sorry Pat Benatar), in this sense, is not far off.

Created to Support Military

“Radio communication is where it started,” says Dan Bell, a retired 22-year veteran of the Marine Corps. “I joined the Marines in 1977 and had to memorize it. I had many classes down at Parish Island. It’s kind of like verbal Morse Code.”

And while he’s absolutely right in its most well-known form, the need to incorporate universal phonetic spelling started pre-WWI as a way to support two-way radio communications (both in militarily and for the amateur radio aficionado) and low-quality long-distance telephone circuits.

Uniformity Helps Combat Background Noise

The early 20th century saw the creation of the Amsterdam-Baltimore Alphabet insomuch that the letters were represented by different country names: Amsterdam, Baltimore, Canada, Denmark, etc. Then, post WWII and after years of additional studies, some done here locally at The Ohio State University in Columbus, the Able-Baker Alphabet was adopted with some new phonetics, to better ensure that words sounded different enough when spoken to combat potential background noise and confusion.

“Many sounds are highly confusable within a language,” says Meghan Sumner, a linguistics professor with Stanford University, in a recent interview with Popular Mechanics reporter Kimberly Hickok. For example, the sounds “th” and “f” and very similar (thin, fin) and easy to confuse, as are “m” and “n” sounds, they explain. “Especially in the contexts that are noisy or when you can’t see the talker,” such as over a radio with background noise or interference. The NATO Phonetic alphabet helps avoid that ambiguity and makes it clear what the letters are, Hickok reported.

Alphabet Was Made Universal

Named after the organization that first approved its broad use, (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the alphabet was standardized to ensure its functionality more broadly.

“Across languages, speakers might hear a sound, but map it onto a different sound category in their own language, especially in context of background noises,” Sumner says. “For example, the Spanish pronunciation of the letter “P” sounds very similar to the English pronunciation of the letter “B.” This could cause issues when communicating the names of the people or places to someone who may not be familiar with those names in the other language, Hickok reported.

“Working with other countries [we] needed familiar language,” further explains Dan Bell. The variety of changes that have been applied over the last almost 100 years to this and other similar phonetic alphabets were done so with the arc of universality to compensate for the differing linguistic tendencies in other countries. Relative to global miliary alliances, its importance in the field cannot be understated as a bridge between countries, though also with a nod to uniformity among American military branches themselves.

“When you communicate in the field, you’ll have the Navy and the Army in the same area [and] when you have joint operations you have to have the same alphabet,” Bell states.

Ironically, in daily use, at least one universally adopted word is officially spelled differently than pop culture conveys: Alpha is actually spelled Alfa.

Similarly, the pronunciations are different that most would have you believe: Lima = LEE MAH; Qubec = KEH BECK; Victor = VIK TAH.

Keep in mind, this alphabet differs in usage, but holds a similar mode of messaging conveyance with other types of speech. For example, acronyms, which are abbreviations of a name or multiple words used as a word itself, like NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), or initialism, which are abbreviations consisting of initial letters pronounced separately, (LOL = Laugh Out Loud, FOMO = Fear Of Missing Out, or CPU = Computer Processing Unit).

So next time someone asks to spell a street name or confirm an alphanumeric license plate, remember the NATO Phonetic Alphabet when speaking with the local customer service representative. Papa-Sierra: There is an alphabet for numbers, too.

Commonly Referenced Phonetic Alphabet Phrases:

Well-known Berlin Wall access point between East and West Berlin, Checkpoint Charlie is actually Checkpoint – C

Oscar Mike = On the Move

Lima Company from Brook park, Ohio is actually Company – L, who are the third battalion of the 25th Marine Regiment (See: Lima Company Memorial at the Ohio Statehouse)

Fans of the History Channel Show The Curse of Oak Island might hear brothers Rick and Marty Lagina refer to buried treasure as ‘Bravo Tango’

Link to websites to grab a table of current NATO Phonetic Alphabet and the one for numbers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet

https://www.popularmechanics.com/culture/a39297126/origin-of-the-nato-phonetic-alphabet/

The post Alfa, Beta, Charlie appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.

The way most people talk to each other has drastically changed in the past few decades. Words, phrases, and jokes are being spoken that would have been absolutely shocking a century ago. Foul language was only spoken by those who were considered “indecent.” Now words like the F-bomb are so commonplace that even children will speak them in conversation. But why does this actually matter? Just because certain ways of speaking were taboo in some other outdated culture doesn’t mean that they are now. How can things like swearing, sexual humor, and sarcasm be a problem? Well, because words really do have power. In fact, they are one of the most powerful forces in the world.

Since words are our way of communicating what we think and feel, they have a direct influence on everyone who hears them. For example, I bet you aren’t thinking about donuts right now, but now that I have mentioned them, you probably are. To take it even further, imagine a large, fluffy donut with a thick layer of shimmering glaze on the outside. It is soft to the touch, and the glaze is so fresh that its gooey texture sticks to your fingers. I’m willing to bet that now you probably are not just thinking about a donut, but you are starting to want one. Perhaps you aren’t. Perhaps you don’t like glazed donuts for some strange reason. But even then, what you just read prompted you to some sort of reaction.

No matter what, when we communicate verbally to another person, we are influencing what they think about, and sometimes even the way that they think. In fact, by reading this very article you are being influenced in some way. Whether that be toward agreement or disagreement with my point, you are thinking more deeply about this topic than you were before you started reading.

But what you say doesn’t just affect others; it also affects you.

The words that we say begin with a thought in our own minds, and when we speak that thought, it actually reinforces our thinking. Psychological evidence shows that if someone repeats a certain phrase numerous times daily over the course of a few weeks, it can actually rewire that person’s brain to come to believe that statement, even if they did not believe it before. Some communist countries have used this as a tactic in their re-education camps for POWs. By making their prisoners repeatedly speak phrases and sentences that are affirming to their communist regime, they eventually start to question what they believe to be true. This can clearly be seen in our own behavior.

For example, I used to work for a Catholic ministry that hosted overnight retreats for teens. There was one group of boys that was adamant about how much they did not want to be there. All they did was complain. There was one moment when everyone was eating breakfast. I remember quite a few teens on the retreat complimenting the food. They enjoyed it and wanted seconds. But not this group. They tried it and thought it was so gross that they refused to eat any more. Same food. Same day. Totally different attitude. By constantly reinforcing the idea that everything at the camp was a bad experience, they convinced themselves that the food, which was ordinarily enjoyable, was disgusting.

If our words have such an effect on others and on ourselves, then we need to take a closer look at the kinds of things that have become normal in our modern culture’s communication. It only takes a couple of minutes on the Internet to see that our world is full of swearing, sexual humor, complaining, and negativity towards others and oneself. These trends in speech are very destructive. Although we might not think that it means anything, when we use foul language and curse words we are choosing to carelessly throw around racial slurs, sexual euphemisms, vulgarities, and more.

There seems to be some dark part of us that revels in speaking an evil word for its own sake, and that ought to concern us. Vulgar sexual humor is even more destructive. Sex is one of the most sacred aspects of being human. It is created to be the deepest expression of love between two individuals, and it serves as the foundation of a healthy family. When sex is misused and removed from its proper context, as it is so severely in the modern day, it destroys families and damages one’s ability to love purely and authentically. When the jokes that we make lead us to rejoice in the perversion of sexuality, we are setting ourselves up for failure and influencing ourselves to see others as sexual objects rather than people.

There are so many ways speech can significantly impact us, negatively and positively. But my encouragement to you is this: if you still are not convinced, I challenge you to try to spot how the things that you hear others say seem to affect you and/or themselves. The Bible describes the tongue as a rudder that steers a ship. What we say is so powerful that it can literally steer the direction of our lives, or even the lives of others. If you want to do good, speak what is good and virtuous to others, and encourage them to do the same. If we can change our culture’s speech, we might just be able to change the world.

The post Purity of Speech appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.

Ah, the classic, typical phrase: “It is what it is.” A true gem of linguistic laziness, perfect for those moments when you want to sound profound without actually saying anything of substance. Instead of offering insight or empathy, it throws up a white flag and surrenders to the chaos of life. Congratulations! You’ve just won the award for Most Unhelpful Response.

You know what takes effort? Actual engagement. Acknowledging feelings. Problem-solving. “It is what it is” is the verbal equivalent of shrugging your shoulders while scrolling through your phone. It’s lazy and dismissive. It is NOT what it is. Fight!! Find a solution. A real conversation might involve some actual thought — imagine the horror!

And let’s not forget how it kills conversations. When you say this, you might as well be saying, “I’m done talking; let’s move on to something less meaningful.”

Next time you feel tempted to lean on this tired cliche, consider a little creativity in your response instead. How about something like, “Life’s a mess, I know.” At least it acknowledges the struggle without pretending it’s just a shrug-worthy fact of life. Remember, the next time someone hits you with “It is what it is,” you have every right to roll your eyes and demand a better conversation.

The post Masterclass in Dismissiveness: ‘It Is What It Is’ appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.

In today’s modern slang, one term stands out in trendy linguistic conformity: “bougie.” This edgy expression, derived from the word bourgeoisie, has become a weapon of choice for those seeking to critique, mock, or simply highlight the perceived pretentiousness of certain individuals. But why has “bougie” become such a go-to term, and what does its rampant usage say about our society?

At its core, “bougie” is a linguistic dig, pointed with precision to spotlight the bubble of social elitism. The term has morphed into a versatile descriptor, an all-encompassing critique of anything deemed excessively upscale or conspicuously extravagant.

From artisanal coffee shops to luxury fashion boutiques, no aspect of contemporary culture is safe from the criticism of “bougie.”

Critics argue that the term has evolved into weaponized shorthand for condemning those who dare to indulge in life’s finer pleasures. It seems as though the very act of savoring a well-aged wine or enjoying a lavish spa day is now subject to scrutiny, as if embracing luxury was a sin in the court of public opinion.

Perhaps the rise of the “bougie” label can be attributed to the societal shift towards a more minimalist and anti-consumerist mindset. As people embrace the idea of a simpler, more sustainable lifestyle, those who continue to revel in opulence find themselves labeled as out of touch or, in the vernacular of the times, “bougie.”

Yet, beneath the surface of this edgy term lies a complex interplay of social dynamics. Is the usage of “bougie” merely a manifestation of class resentment, a rebellion against the entrenched structures of privilege? Or does it serve as a linguistic equalizer, a way for individuals from all walks of life to level the playing field by ridiculing excesses?

It’s worth noting that the term “bougie” doesn’t discriminate – it can be applied to anything from living in Granville to a meticulously crafted avocado toast. Its scope is broad, and its impact is undeniable, creating a linguistic battleground where lifestyle choices become ammunition for social commentary.

As with any edgy term, the danger lies in oversimplification. Using “bougie” as a catch-all critique risks dismissing the nuances of individual choices and experiences. What may seem extravagant to one person might be a hard-earned reward for another. The danger lies in turning a tongue-in-cheek descriptor into a divisive line in the sand, where one’s allegiance to a particular lifestyle becomes a point of contention.

In the end, the term “bougie” may just be another manifestation of the age-old tension between the haves and the have-nots, dressed up in the fashionable attire of contemporary slang. As society continues to grapple with issues of inequality and privilege, perhaps it’s time to reflect on the deeper meanings behind our linguistic choices and recognize that the edgy allure of “bougie” might be masking a more profound conversation about class, culture, and individualism.

One could even argue that using the term itself is, in fact, bougie.

The post ‘Bougie’: What’s This Word About? appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.

The post Decoding Decades appeared first on Headliners Mission Group.