Even the "Easy Going" have Pet Peeves

People have labeled me as an "easy-going" or rational person. I do not get worked up, frustrated, or angry easily or often as it takes too much energy to get upset about small things. Pet peeves are irrational, as they are based on exaggerating an annoyance. One cannot explain why something so small might annoy them to a great degree because it the feeling of annoyance is backed my feelings, not rationale.

My Pet Peeve: unfairness. I find myself getting very upset, angry, and irrational in even small situations of unfairness. I am competitive, and thus truely dislike unfair advantages. In a game of Cranium between me and three friends, I threw a tantrum over who's turn it was after we realized we miss-read the rules. This was supposed to be a fun game between four friends, and when everyone should have been enjoying themselves, I made it about the game - a stupid, small, board game. In the long run, I pushed away my friends (they no longer play cranium with me) and gained nothing, as the game ended soon after my tantrum. Thus pet peeves turn seemingly rational people irrational, and I am no exception.

Emotion and Language

Geoff Nunberg (2010) discusses in his article “ ‘Equation,’ ‘Gingerly’ And Other Linguistic Pet Peeves” that in modern society people often misuse some words, phrases and grammar, differing from its original meaning and the way of proper use. At the same time, he emphasizes the importance of using proper English in modern society. As we learned, pathos works as a tool to establish the relationship between you and your audience. Therefore, understanding the relationship between language and emotion is extremely crucial to appeal to your audience in the most effective way.

Every individual has their own method of using a language. Thus, it is often true that one’s use of language is not acceptable to others. When your audience perceives your language as awkward or weird, you probably discomfort or annoy them. Thus, what you try to express might not be as strong as another manner of saying the same thing. Also, it is possible that your words might not be too memorable to others, which is a failure on your part to communicate with others appropriately.

I think that linguistic pet peeves are noticed by people when the words are misused or the sentences are grammatically incorrect. As an example, the author brought up the word “oversimplistic’ and said that people do not understand how to use the word “simplistic” in the first place. According to him, oversimplistic is basically same as simplistic, so there is no point to add “over” in this word. This is a very good example that shows how logos failed and pathos catches the reader’s attention. When people use this word, they want to express their feelings about it more precisely; thus adding the word “over.” Therefore, I am comfortable with these expressions and feel comfortable listening to it, because I can analyze more precisely about how a person is feeling. Also, the author suggested some other words as well such as “gingerly”. He claimed that the word “gingerly” should not be used as an adverb because there is no corresponding adjective. However, the sentence, “she hugged the child gingerly” is still fine with me. I am not annoyed by this sentence as it flows naturally.

One of my personal linguistic pet peeves is the phrase ““I ain’t going nowhere” Obviously, “ain’t” and “nowhere” cannot coexist in a sentence because they both are negative forms of words. Thus, “nowhere” should be replaced with the word “anywhere”. As another example, I am so annoyed when people overuse the word “like”. It seems as if the speaker is not clearly telling me what he or she wants to say. Furthermore, I do not like hearing the word “technically”. As an example, “I technically went there”. The problem here is whether you actually went or not, so the word “technically” is clearly unnecessary.

Although the author seems to put his focus more on the original meaning of words and proper English, I believe that misuse of language is still fine as long as the sentence flows naturally, the definition is coherent and it is in informal usages. Because pathos is something to establish the relationship between you and the audience, if your audience is feeling comfortable with your language and expressions, there should not be any problem. In fact, languages change and differ in its meaning over the time. While the author discusses regarding the common misuse of English, I came to realize that it is still fine to accept new way of language. The author said that “She hugged the child gingerly” is not correct, because it use gingerly as an adverb. However, this sentence and the use of the word “gingerly” do not seem so weird for me. Rather, it sounds very natural and understandable; hence, I would not notice the error in here unless the author points out specifically. In Japan, where I came from, there are so many words which are misused by the younger generation. I assume that this is because our generation is exposed to many kinds of media and information technologies. I believe that language is always reflecting our current society and era. Therefore, denying its evolution is very difficult to do. What I think is that we should not hesitate to accept modern way of linguistics, because that is possibly the future of a language. It seems that the meanings of language is rather arbitrary than absolute, so we do not need to adhere so much to its original meaning. Still, it is important to use proper language in a formal situation, but it is also important to notice that the language is evolving.

Elaborating on the structure of languages is one of the most difficult tasks to accomplish. The article mainly focuses on errors in contemporary English, and how it often annoys certain audiences. Well, I believe that it is very significant to employ proper English in order to avoid making others feel annoyed for the purpose of establishing a good relationship between you and your audience. However, while this is important, we also should be aware of the fact that the definitions of English words alter and shape over the periods. Still, it is essential to use proper English in formal circumstance such as a research paper, writing essays and giving speeches in a class. However, language is constantly undergoing the process of evolution, and this is something we cannot stop.

Easy = True

I definitely agree with the article because the majority of people are unwilling to search for the things they need or want to know. So, because something is easy to find it will be seen more often. And what is true often comes from what the majority of people believe. The best example of this is the internet. The things that can be found easiest on the internet are obviously seen the most, as more people see them they will spread the word to their friends and so on. This also goes for television because whatever is seen on television news is taken for truth without question.

The article doesn’t really change the way I think about rhetoric because I already knew that it was an important part of the way our world works; however, it does speak to the power of the people who are able to understand and employ rhetoric in useful ways. I have read about many studies that show how companies or products with easy to say names fair better than those with difficult to say names. Which goes right along with what the article says about easy equals true.