A couple of times a month, it seems, a new blog post or article comes out with advice on grammar for people entering the business or professional world. Since that group includes most of the seniors who will be graduating from my institution this coming spring, I occasionally check in on what advice is being proffered. The latest list, from the advice website Work + Money, comprises “ways of saying certain words and phrases” that will help readers “strive for impeccable speech.”
To spare you the “slide show,” I list here the alternatives this site chooses, in the order in which the original compiler lists them. Color coding explained below.
“for all intensive purposes” vs. “for all intents and purposes”
“I could care less” vs. “I couldn’t care less”
“One in the same” vs. “one and the same”
“on accident” vs. “by accident”
“fall by the waste side” vs. “fall by the wayside”
“self-depreciating” vs. “self-deprecating”
“irregardless” vs. “regardless”
“jive with” vs. “jibe with”
“tongue and cheek” vs. “tongue in cheek”
“make do” vs. “make due”*
“nip it in the butt” vs. “nip it in the bud”
“shoe-in” vs. “shoo in”
“piece of mind” vs. “peace of mind”
“peek interest” vs. “peak interest” vs. “pique interest”
“do good” vs. “do well”
“mute point” vs. “moot point”
“nerve wrecking” vs. “nerve wracking”
“buy in large” vs. “by and large”
“proceed” vs. “precede”
“shade light on” vs. “shed light on”
“down the pipe” vs. “down the pike”
“doggie dog” vs. “dog eat dog”
“flush it out” vs. “flesh it out”
“physical year” vs. “fiscal year”
“deep-seeded” vs. “deep-seated”
“sneak peak” vs. “sneak peek”
“bemused” vs. “amused”
“anyways” vs. “anyway”
“escape goat” vs. “scapegoat”
“without further adieu” vs. “without further ado”
“step foot” vs. “set foot”
“should of” vs. “should have”
“try and” vs. “try to”
“beckon call” vs. “beck and call”
“hone in” vs. “home in”
“case and point” vs. “case in point”
I have color-coded this list according to the way I explain these so-called mistakes, understanding that some examples could be coded at least two ways and that others might sort the list differently.
Blue phrases entail an original expression that is, as one commenter remarked the other week of strait and narrow, a legal doublet — that is, the two words linked by and mean essentially the same thing, so one can understand why a young speaker might think the expression should be something else. Green phrases suggest a trending change; my son began saying on accident to match the phrase on purpose at an early age, and since then I’ve heard it among many young people — and why not? Red phrases suggest to me a prejudice — perhaps class-based, perhaps prescriptivism-based — against certain locutions, some of which actually involve mistaken ideas about the meaning of a word (proceed/precede) and others of which suggest regional or class-based idiom. In phrases coded purple, though the distinction may be significant and the “wrong” phrase even nonsensical, I find no audible difference — and the list begins with the goal of “impeccable speech.” (Granted, the author also mentions the importance of using “the right spelling and phrasing” in emails, but when she writes, “Keep in mind, too, that some of these common phrases you’ll won’t be able to hear the difference,” I tend to remember that old adage about glass houses.) Brown phrases are those wherein it seemed to me that the original expression uses a word so fallen into disuse among young adults that it makes sense for them to start reshaping the phrase — even if the result falls wide of the logical mark. Finally, orange phrases are those I think the author invented. I mean, seriously? Has anyone else heard nip it in the butt or escape goat from a business newbie or an intern? And isn’t piece of mind a spell-checker typo? (And yes, they should proofread. That’s a different subject.)
My point is not that enforcing the “right” use of phrases in the professional world continues a sorry tradition of setting idiom in stone. It may do that, but the business world is also a conservative and unforgiving place, perhaps not the best context in which to be playing with language. My point, rather, is that by creating a grab bag of so-called errors — which, as far as I can tell, is what all these lists do — the author gives her willing listeners 36 tricky items to memorize, probably a useless task. We’d do better to understand what constitutes an expression and why it changes — over time, in certain contexts, by region or class, through repeated verbal use (a norange, anyone?). Armed with that understanding, the professional novice can find her way, even if, on accident, she sometimes gets it “wrong.”
*The author here lists the “correct” phrase first and the “wrong” one second, which suggests how difficult it is, sometimes, to tell them apart.
