WHO'S WHOSE. A No-Nonsense Guide to Easily Confused Words.pdf

WHO S WHOSE?

A No-Nonsense Guide to

Easily Confused Words

PHILIP GOODEN

A BLOOMSBURY REFERENCE BOOK

www.bloomsbury.com/reference

reproduced in any form or by any means without

the prior written permission of the publisher.

First published in 2004 by

Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

38 Soho Square

London W1D 3HB

The right of Philip Gooden to be identiﬁed as

the author of this work has been asserted by him

in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and

Patents Act 1988.

A catalogue record for this book is available from

the British Library

ISBN 0 7475 7231 3

eISBN-13: 978-1-4081-0310-4

13579108642

All papers used by Bloomsbury Publishing are natural,

recyclable products made from wood grown in

well-managed forests. The manufacturing processes

conform to the environmental regulations of the

country of origin.

Typeset by Reﬁnecatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

Printed and bound in Great Britain by

Clays Ltd, St Ives plc

INTRODUCTION

Who’s or whose ? Disinterested or uninterested ? Ameliorate or alleviate ? Is there

anybody who hasn’t at some point had to consider, when faced with a

choice between these or other similar-sounding words, which one will

better convey the required shade of meaning? Or, more simply, hasn’t

stopped to wonder which word is the right one?

All of us, in practice, choose the language which we use. And we

choose all the time, whether consciously or not. The expressions in an e-

mail will be different from those used in a formal letter; the words said in

the pub aren’t necessarily the same as the words heard in the workplace.

Almost everybody adjusts the register of his or her language, according to

circumstances and company. A lot of this may be instinctive, but it is an

instinct which is constantly being modiﬁed and reﬁned. We learn about

the words we use as we go along.

English is a wealthy language. The number of words available to any

speaker or writer of it comfortably exceeds half a million, at least in

theory. Anybody who has a working knowledge of just 5% of that total

can claim to have an extensive vocabulary, much more than is needed for

everyday purposes. Buried in this great heap of words are many duplicates

or near-duplicates, terms that mean the same or almost the same as other

terms. And, more deceptively, there are words that look or sound as though

they mean the same as others. This book is a guide to some of the most

frequent and interesting confusables in English – or confusibles (there’s a

choice here too).

Anybody who writes about English usage needs to face the question:

Does it matter? Is the misuse – or abuse – of language truly important? We

generally manage to make our meaning clear, even if our vocabulary is

pretty basic, perhaps especially if it is pretty basic. Are slips of the tongue

where one says less instead of fewer , or uncertainties about whether to

write phase or faze really signiﬁcant? Sometimes, the answer must be no.

Your listener or reader may not care about any mistake, may not even

notice any mistake. But, of course, the reverse is also true. That listener or

reader may notice, may care.

I wouldn’t, however, want to base a defence of correct usage solely on

what others might think – that makes the whole business too nervy and

defensive. Speaking and writing English is about communicating with

others, naturally, but much of the beneﬁt of using language well is for the

sake of the user. There is a great increase in conﬁdence and, yes, an

iii

increase in pleasure in saying what one wants to say, in having a ﬁrm grasp

of the intricacies of vocabulary – or some of the intricacies, since there

will always be that other half a million words or so to get familiar with.

And English does not become much more intricate or tangled than in the

area of confusables.

There are several reasons why all of us confuse words, whether often or

occasionally. It may be no more than a matter of spelling ( advice/advise ) or

uncertainty about which way round a term applies ( reliable/reliant ). At

other times the distinction between expressions may be subtle ( defective/

deﬁcient ) or hard to pin down ( recourse/resource ). And there is yet another

category where people assume a difference but where, in practice, none

exists ( stanch and staunch ; inoculate and vaccinate ). Confusables have

always existed, of course, but reliance on the spellchecker, and the general

speeding-up of the publishing process, mean that we see more and more

confused spellings and usages in print.

Of course, the words in Who’s Whose? are just the tip of the iceberg. Or

– thinking of those half million or more still to go – the tip of the tip. But

this is the part which is the most visible.

The entries in this book are organised alphabetically, sometimes with

the more familiar form/spelling coming ﬁrst (e.g. bizarre/bazaar ). An

opening sentence or two helps to outline the reason(s) why the two or

more terms are mixed up. The main part of each entry deﬁnes the terms,

with examples generally drawn from the newspapers, although with a few

from other sources such as ﬁction. (Where I have not found particular

usages I have made up examples.) At the end of each entry is an

Embarrassment rating which rates – on a scale from nil (represented by

) through moderate (represented by

) to high (represented by

) – the ‘seriousness’ of confusing the words under discussion. And

ﬁnally, under the heading of How to avoid , there is some guidance on

telling the confusables apart, how to avoid writing one for the other, etc.

In some cases the guidance may perhaps be trickier to recall than the

original words, and I would always suggest that, in cases of doubt, the user

should consult a dictionary or a reference book like this one rather than

struggle with memory aids. Sometimes, the best advice that can be given

over English usage is simply: be careful. And the next best is: use a

dictionary. It helps, too, to be aware of words which are likely to cause

you, or others, problems.

The newspapers which I have gone to for examples – mostly of correct

use but sometimes of misuse – are The Times , the Guardian , the Daily

Telegraph , the Independent , and occasionally the Daily Mirror and the Sun .

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: