Grammar / Spelling Rant thread

[kiyoat]

Here's one I get wrong myself (see post #3 above).  So this is a learning opportunity for me, too.

"Toeing the line" means to accept the authority, principles or policy of a particular group, (especially under pressure).



"Towing the line" is, of course, something else entirely.



Apparently, the expression started with uniform inspection lines in the 18th century Royal Navy, where the seamen were barefoot.  Some have wrongly attributed it with the start of a footrace instead... So now we (including me) have learned a thing or two...

[gopheryote]

I'm going to pile on to the rant thing for a moment, since a fingernails-on-the-chalkboard thing for me is all social media lately...
A recession is not - and never has been - defined as two quarters of negative growth. I'm not sure how this has become political (it isn't), and I'm not sure why so many people suddenly have an opinion without actually knowing what they are talking about. (OK, that isn't true. I know it is the Dunning Kruger Effect.) But I'm even seeing fellow USD grads (presumably B-Schoolers) mention it on Twitter. For crying out loud, even the last 2 recessions wouldn't have fit the 2-in-a-row definition.

Phew. I feel better now. I'm sure everyone was hoping for some GDP/recession definition talk on this board, right?

[sdyotefan]

I disagree. Two consecutive Qs of decline in GDP is a macro definition of a recession. In fact the last 10 times that happened there was a recession.

Politicians love to bend words to their liking. Hopefully that doesn't shock anyone! Even Biden's economic advisor used that definition a couple of years ago when to his political advantage. Several days ago he said it wasn't the definition.

If any of you haven't read the book "1984" it's way past time you read it.

[gopheryote]

Jul 28, 2022 12:08:51 GMT -6 sdyotefan said:

I disagree. Two consecutive Qs of decline in GDP is a macro definition of a recession. In fact the last 10 times that happened there was a recession.

Politicians love to bend words to their liking. Hopefully that doesn't shock anyone! Even Biden's economic advisor used that definition a couple of years ago when to his political advantage. Several days ago he said it wasn't the definition.

If any of you haven't read the book "1984" it's way past time you read it.

OK, we need sports to start so I have something else to do with my free time.

First of all - I completely agree that politicians will bend words. That is a topic unto itself. But the definition of a recession isn't up to politicians. If you want to use 2 quarters of decline as a rule of thumb, I have no particular issue with that. It's like other guidelines: 1st and goal from the 1, line up under center and run the ball.

In reality, the determination of a recession is determined by the National Bureau of Economic Research's "Business Cycle Dating Committee". (Side note - I truly wonder how many politicians even know the NBER exists.) For some of the most dull reading you will ever see: www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating  Long story short - more things than GDP are used to determine a recession - most notably unemployment*.

This is the GDP from the early 2000's recession (note there were never 2 straight negatives):



Here is the 2008-09 recession, which actually started in December of 2007 - a full year before there were 2 straight negatives:



* - the latest unemployment rates still show 2 jobs for every 1 applicant, which is why I do not think these past two quarters will end up being a recession. The labor market is bananas right now.

[sdyotefan]

As a USD grad with an econ minor, I can tell you that economists are like a lot of groups. If you get ten economists in a room they'll have a hundred theories about why something may happen or has happened.

With inflation at an annual rate of 9+% and the Fed having to raise rates by .75% a pop (meaning higher borrowing rates for companies and individuals)
those facts don't bode well for the economy.

Irregardless looking forward to football!!

[Yotes]

Pay attention to whatever buzzwords politicians are using and you'll see words take on new or altered meanings. The people driving the buzzwords know that with enough repetition that their new definition will be blurred with the actual definition and they can declare themselves correct.

It really is its own category separate from your conventional misspelling and bad grammar.

[canislatrans]

I did a google search on 'recession' and found most media outlets with articles defining (or redefining) the word, on the same day. Almost as if the Ministry of Truth put out an edict. he,he I jest!

I did find an interesting point of view by Peter Jacobsen, "Who Really Needs a Definition of Recession?" fee.org/articles/who-really-needs-a-definition-of-recession/

Full disclosure, it's Libertarian, but they seem to be REASONable people.

[sdyotefan]

Thanks canislatrans. Was a good article.

In a similar but shorter version as Trey Gowdy said a few days ago paraphrasing--people don't need to know the definition of a recession they just know is the economy is bad or not good.

[kiyoat]

Random addition to the grammar thread:

"dominate" vs "dominant"

1. Dominate is typically a VERB, as in:
"that player just dominates all of his/her opponents".

2. Dominant is typically an ADJECTIVE or ADVERB, as in:
"that player is dominant in the paint" (adjective).
or "He dominantly dunked on that dude" (adverb).

3. I often see people dropping the "N" when they should be using it, as in:
"He/She is such a dominate post player". 

It irritates me, but I do think that some of the reason is that as Americans and Midwesterners, we often don't pronounce the second "N" in that word, or pronounce it very weakly.  As a thought experiment, try pronouncing "dominant" with a posh British accent.  The second N becomes much more clear, right?

It's just a theory of mine.  The alternative view is that people are just becoming much dumber, and less able or willing to care about grammar.  So I'm hoping for the best.

PS: English teachers, feel free to pick my work apart.  I could be technically wrong with the adjective/adverb distinction, but my general point is correct (that people are using it wrongly).

[kiyoat]

Almost forgot the graphic illustration for dominate/dominant!  Here you go: