Conversation or kicking the can down the road?

We need to have a conversation about this phrase, "We need to have a conversation about . . ." because when anyone says it, you know they mean a monologue and do it my way or let's move on to something else. Right or left, doesn't matter. I'd put it right up there with "Let's do lunch sometime."

I Googled it—557,000 matches.

Racism. Race in America. Education. Technology. School security. Truth and art. Guns. Rape. Your lack of seriousness. Changes in our pension plan. PTSD. Minimum wage. How to do better. Unwed mothers. Gay marriage. It. Sex education. Character and values. Immigration.  Chicago.  What’s been goin’ on. Australia Day. Refinancing debt. Cops. Standardized testing. Abortion. Smurfs. Rules of the game. Big Data needs. Renewable energy. Living. Covering fires in near by towns. Classroom etiquette. Choices for seniors [elderly]. Your cat. Quaker history. Immorality. How we define that. Where we're going and how we're going to get there. A breakfast casserole. Twitter. Drugs in hip-hop music. HIV/AIDS. Hardcore atheists.  Ableism. Health benefits. New literacies. The future. Missed curfew. Spending priorities. Pluralism in Islam. Mental health.  All these things.

I looked through about 15 Google pages; not once did I see the word ACA or Obamacare.  I guess those have been talked to death.

Thursday Thirteen--13 fudge phrases in American English.

English is a marvelously flexible language--has about 2 million words because it borrows from so many cultures. So why overuse some of them and dumb down our lovely language? These 13 get my vote--and my goat. If I never heard them again, I'd dance on their graves.

1. I have nothing against . . . or I don’t have a problem with. . . [be on the alert for racist, sexist, ageist or ethnic comment with the first, and nit-pickiness about a committee or task force report on the second] Another version is, Some of my best friends are. . . .

2. If it’s all the same to you . . . [You know it probably won’t be.]

3. Do you mind if I smoke. . . [We don’t hear this one much anymore--smoking near anyone is now against the law in Ohio in many places, even outdoors, but in the “bad old days” you knew he was going to light up and make your clothes stink and your lungs rot. Women didn't even bother to ask.]

4. Let’s do lunch sometime. . . [Good-bye, I’m waaaay too busy and important to talk right now.]

5. With all due respect. . . [A way to say, “I disagree,” without saying it.]

6. I’m looking to. . . [Only the less educated used this in the past, but now it is everywhere, even the WSJ and NYT. It means "I’m planning to . . ." or "I’m thinking about. . .", but seems to imply using logical thought to make a decision is suspect. Probably came along with using "I feel" instead of "I think."]

7. I think we need to ask ourselves. . . [Experts use this phrase to introduce what they want you to do--it’s a fudgy way to be bossy and authoritative.]

8. At the end of the day. . . [I actually heard a caller to a talk show say, “At the end of the day there’s light at the end of the tunnel” and “Finally, at the end of the day, the bottom line is. . . “ This is a useless phrase; if it has a meaning, it is “finally.”

9. It’s generally believed that. . . (fill in the blank) [Something is about to be said you’ve never heard of, or disagree with, like “humans control global warming“ and you (but not I) need to cut back on your carbon footprint.]

10. How ‘bout them Buckeyes or (your team’s name here). [Guys say this in place of ordinary polite greetings, such as “Good Afternoon,” or “How are you?”]

11. I’m no expert, but. . . [I’m about to pretend to be one.]

12. It’s easy, you just . . . [This won’t be easy at all--you‘d better take notes.]

13. Basically / Absolutely. Basically, these two words are the most overused words in American English. Don’t you agree? Absolutely! “Basically” is used in place of stammering (repeat the phrase 3 or 4 times to make it work) while you think of something to say, and “Absolutely” is a 4 syllable word for Yes.

E.S. Browning pitches like a girl

Several times I've written posts about the differences in writing style between men and women. Most of my examples come from the Wall Street Journal. Women staff writers of this publication use fewer idioms, less colorful language, and usually include more direct quotes. Their articles also contain a "yes, but. . ." lead if they are presenting anything positive about the economy or culture. Or they hate to commit. The good news will be placed near the bottom, if you persevere through their stodgy style. Let me offer some examples by writers whose names clearly indicate their sex.

First the guys in yesterday's paper:

"The hedge-fund locomotive ran into some impossible obstacles but for the most part kept chugging ahead in 2006." Gregory Zuckerman

"Latin American stocks surged to a 4th straight year of double-digit increases, their longest streak in at least 19 years, as global investors increased bets that big economies such as Mexico and Brazil have bid "adios" to a rocky past of one crisis after another." John Lyons

"The deal-making world can hardly suppress its glee about 2006, which will go down as the best year to date. Business has been so good that some are gritting their teeth, afraid their luck may somehow run out." Dennis K. Berman

And now the ladies:

"Bond investors enter 2007 divided about the prospects for the U.S. economy. They will find out in the coming months which camp has it right." Serena Ng

"Asian stocks logged another year of gains, but it wasn't an easy ride for investors." Laura Santini

"As the air rushed in and out of the crude-oil market in 2006, the breathless rise and surprising fall dominated discussion of whether the commodity boom could last." Ann Davis

Notice the next time you read WSJ, Forbes or Business Week: The men who write about business, politics and economics heavily use gambling, sports, technological, automotive and agricultural idioms, anecdotes, methaphors and analogies. They play games with words and tease the reader just a bit--using double meanings, puns and ambiguities. They coin new words, invent proverbs, use slang, and get sloppy with foreign words, like using "adios" in my second example (for Brazil it should be Portuguese, not Spanish).

The women, on the other hand, are more literal, timid and bland. If they do use figurative language, the phrase is probably so commonplace, we don't even notice, i.e. they are as dull as dishwater but hit the nail on the head. They tend toward touchy-feely and weakly emotional words to humanize the markets--"disappointing performance," "hoping it starts strongly," "outlook is cloudy," "could fizzle," etc.

So all this leads me to E. S. Browning. He writes like a woman. The exception that proves my rule. In fact, because of his use of initials (his friends call him Jim according to one article I Googled), I'd always figured he was a female--that and his straight-forward, gloomy, no-nonsense writing style. He's a 27 year staff writer veteran for the Journal and is the writers' union representative, according to articles that quote him.

"Investors are approaching 2007 with a high degree of optimism--perhaps too high, some skeptics worry." E. S. Browning