When people complain about "ten dollar words"...

[Nibbler]

... do you do a quick evaluation of your communication style?

Sometimes I self-consciously wonder "Have I ever been accused of it in someone's mind?" And then I become a little indignant that I don't use "$10 words". I just use words.

And I'm left wondering in these passive-aggressive shaming sessions (complaints about $10 words that are "meant to make the speaker sound smart, but really it shows their insecurity") as really wrong and wildly emotional in appeal.

Sure, there are probably other personality types who do that. But to wholesale sum it up as "insecurity, trying to sound smart" sounds really insecure on their parts.

What do you think?
Who gets to decide what a $10 word is?

Once I was accused of calling someone stupid because I used the word "antagonize" in a sentence.

I'm not dumbing down my vocabulary.
I wouldn't know where to start!!!

edit: Why can't they simply crack a dictionary? It's what I do when I encounter a word I don't know. I see a word I don't know and I go "Gee! What an interesting word! In context, I think it means XYZ. But let's look it up..." I don't complain. I just educate myself.

 

[Hadoblado]

When you said '$10 word', I wasn't sure whether you meant small words or big ones :P

You meant big ones though.

Some sentences are necessary but boring. I want to spruce them up.

Sometimes one good word can be worth multiple sentences.

I also figure that the only way to improve your vocabulary is to use it. When I read a word I don't know, I'm going to try to use it in a sentence soon, or I'll forget it.

But I'm pretty sure I'd be lying if I said that I never deliberately used bigger words in order to impress, or even sometimes to make people just nod and smile so I can move on if I'm feeling lazy.

So yeah, the behaviour they're railing against exists. I don't know if people try to make others feel stupid through use of larger words necessarily, but I can see that being a biproduct of trying to puff themselves up. But the assumption that that's all there is to big words is a little silly. It's the kind of thing people bring up to sound smart themselves (sets up wordy person to look like an idiot, making themselves look both smart and pragmatic), though again, that's probably not the only reason they do it.

Obviously the lynch mob can go too far when antagonised

 

[Pyropyro]

It depends on the setting. I don't use "big words" in forums or restaurants but do so on academic settings. If I have to use them then I do sparingly. I also give their definitions if the audience I'm talking to isn't a bunch of experts. I don't do "OMG Look it up you know-nothing ignoramus". You're speaking/ writing to provide info, to persuade or to entertain, not to be acknowledged as smart (That's what's social media are for).

By the way using big words needlessly makes you look stupid. It's just poor writing/ speaking skills.

 

[Nibbler]

But the assumption that that's all there is to big words is a little silly. It's the kind of thing people bring up to sound smart themselves (sets up wordy person to look like an idiot, making themselves look both smart and pragmatic), though again, that's probably not the only reason they do it.

Yes, exactly. I see it as passive-aggressive shaming trying to bring themselves up needlessly when I (personally) was not trying to take them down. In fact, I give people credit that they are smart enough.

Obviously the lynch mob can go too far when antagonised

Haaaaa!

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I notice similar things. Some people don't take too kindly to my usual reliance on often archaic or uncommon phrases. I definitely don't do it on purpose, it comes naturally as those are the first words that fit within the intended meaning bracket so I use them.

Over the years I've learnt to adjust my idiolect to the particular groups of people so that I don't irk those I don't want to upset and to make the communication smoother and more efficient. There are some places where I can let myself go like here for instance.

What do you think?
Who gets to decide what a $10 word is?

You are the only judge of your intentions. If you know you've used the word naturally and without any desire to come off as sophisticated or superior then it's their problem with ascribing false motives to your actions.

Often your need to communicate and finish the business outweighs the need for freedom of expression and in those cases it's also favourable to adjust the wording for the occasion. If you don't then you're the one at fault for denying your cooperation.

Some others are incapable of learning or understanding you at their level of mental capacity. You wouldn't expect a child or elderly to know everything you do or to learn it quickly enough to keep up. Those people deserve to hear a more tailored version of your message and why make it impossible for them to understand you.

By the way using big words needlessly makes you look stupid. It's just poor writing/ speaking skills.

Yeah. It's quite true. There's greater talent involved in composing short, concise messages than there is in writing complex and long paragraphs to convey the same thing.

 

[Nibbler]

It depends on the setting. I don't use "big words" in forums or restaurants but do so on academic settings. If I have to use them then I do sparingly. I also give their definitions if the audience I'm talking to isn't a bunch of experts. I don't do "OMG Look it up you know-nothing ignoramus". You're speaking/ writing to provide info, to persuade or to entertain, not to be acknowledged as smart (That's what's social media are for).

By the way using big words needlessly makes you look stupid. It's just poor writing/ speaking skills.

I used to be a technical writer, so I know about audience. And for those points, I agree. It's like when I make an argument in an internet discussion, you'll NEVER read me say "Do your own research!" when I make a claim and someone asks for evidence. That's MY burden to communicate effectively when I'm attempting to impart learning.

However, if I'm at work and say "The plan is coming to fruition" I don't expect to see a confused cocked-head puppy look from a college educated peer. (That's not what brought this subject up... something else on the Internet did. It's just an example from my past).

Fruition is not an unfair word to use. She didn't complain, but she didn't know what the word is. That tells me that there've been other times I've used appropriate level words that MAYBE people didn't know and they rail to someone else later in private: "Always with the big words, that one!"

In high school, I tended to use our English class vocabulary words soon after we learned them. Not to sound smart, but only because they took their place in my brain. Once a girl said "Are you an intellectual?" when I was merely chatting with her. She giggled and said "You have such a good vocabulary!"

I was stunned.

 

[Brontosaurie]

If there's no simpler word available, it can't be wrong. This goes for 'antagonize' as far as i know.

I used to try and stuff my writing and even speaking with big words, partially to impress and partially to explore nuances of language. At the same time i was very picky about logical structure and total explication, as if no recipient would be able to fill in any blanks. This combination can be very confusing and insulting at the same time. I sometimes fall back into such habits, but i've learned the power of bluntness and suggestion and i try to stick with that.

From what i can tell, Nibbler, you don't need to worry. Just screw the haters and move on.

 

[Nibbler]

You are the only judge of your intentions. If you know you've used the word naturally and without any desire to come off as sophisticated or superior then it's their problem with ascribing false motives to your actions.

Often your need to communicate and finish the business outweighs the need for freedom of expression and in those cases it's also favourable to adjust the wording for the occasion. If you don't then you're the one at fault for denying your cooperation.

You said a lot of smart things. But for this in particular, yes, I agree. I guess it burns a little when I encounter wholesale accusations about vocabulary, and the accusations come off as shaming and with "mind reading".

As I've gotten older, I've learned to adjust not only my word choice, but also my social skills (something I had to develop in adulthood, as a late bloomer... I'm sure I'm not alone in that on this forum) depending on who I'm with. I guess also part of my frustration is that I can't mind-read when I've done my best to adjust, will I still "fail" at trying to fit in with them when I had no intentions of causing a stir.

 

[Pyropyro]

@OP I like Bronto's rule. If a simpler word/phrase will suffice then use it. If not go ahead and use the big word. If you follow that rule and still get hate then there's no issue on your part.

 

[Nibbler]

partially to explore nuances of language.

OK, yes. I HAVE done that. I think (as honestly as possible) that it is innocent in intent when I do it.

At the same time i was very picky about logical structure and total explication, as if no recipient would be able to fill in any blanks. This combination can be very confusing and insulting at the same time. I sometimes fall back into such habits, but i've learned the power of bluntness and suggestion and i try to stick with that.

Yes, yes, yes! I have done that, too. And I've learned to adapt, as well. That's for me to accept as a learning experience. I'd like to add that when I'm being blunt, I *think* I have gauged the audience correctly and go in with the philosophy that it's insulting to define words to people unless they ask. I wouldn't use antagonize and then immediately define it unless it was a technical word. As it's not a technical word, if I felt compelled to define it, I'd feel like I'm calling you stupid. And if I felt that way, I wouldn't use it in the first place.

From what i can tell, Nibbler, you don't need to worry. Just screw the haters and move on.

Thanks. I was evaluating my writing here just now thinking "Mmm... Nothing really big in vocabulary here. But I've gotten into the "You stuck up, %$$@!!!" mess before thinking I didn't say anything terribly complicated.

 

[Nibbler]

@OP I like Bronto's rule. If a simpler word/phrase will suffice then use it. If not go ahead and use the big word. If you follow that rule and still get hate then there's no issue on your part.

I think I naturally do that. But as said above [I can't find the quote], if one word fills in so many blanks and saves a lot of time, I'm naturally going to use it with innocent intent. Thanks for the feedback. It was really helpful!

 

[Nibbler]

I guess I maybe contradicted myself when I said I wasn't going to "dumb down my vocabulary" and then later I said I do adapt. I don't see it as dumbing something down when I adjust for audience. But if it came across like I was calling people dumb as I haughtily alluded to a refusal to adapt, then I cop to the problematic word use. Perhaps it was frustration. In any case, it's not acceptable.

edit: Last evaluative edit. When I originally said I won't dumb down my vocabulary, it was across the board that I won't. That is, if it came across that I was speaking about not for ANYONE. I meant not for ALL situations, fully scaled back always restricting my speaking style. My "individuality" as the kids may say. :P

OK. That's enough self-satisfying introspection.

 

[EditorOne]

Just another facet of this: Is everyone familiar with the use of specialized language to exclude those who aren't "in the know?" I see this a lot among people who have an almost desperate need to feel part of a group, no matter how artificial. It is most noticeable, to me, among educators, who seem to use language as an opaque barrier of obfuscatory terms to thwart understanding by laymen.

 

[Sinny91]

I used to be a technical writer, so I know about audience. And for those points, I agree. It's like when I make an argument in an internet discussion, you'll NEVER read me say "Do your own research!" when I make a claim and someone asks for evidence. That's MY burden to communicate effectively when I'm attempting to impart learning.

I generally don't accept that burden. I have my own standards of communication, they may differ to yours. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

 

[Kuu]

However, if I'm at work and say "The plan is coming to fruition" I don't expect to see a confused cocked-head puppy look from a college educated peer. (That's not what brought this subject up... something else on the Internet did. It's just an example from my past).

Fruition is not an unfair word to use. She didn't complain, but she didn't know what the word is. That tells me that there've been other times I've used appropriate level words that MAYBE people didn't know and they rail to someone else later in private: "Always with the big words, that one!"

In high school, I tended to use our English class vocabulary words soon after we learned them. Not to sound smart, but only because they took their place in my brain. Once a girl said "Are you an intellectual?" when I was merely chatting with her. She giggled and said "You have such a good vocabulary!"

I was stunned.

Evidently you don't know your audience enough. You need to down calibrate your assumptions regarding the average person. Assume ignorance unless you've got good reason not to (ignorance, not stupidity). In most contexts I talk to people no different than I would a 10 year old. At first I expected them to be offended, but they're in fact happier that way than if I talked to them "normally" which makes me an "arrogant, pretentious nerd" in their eyes.

See, people generally want to consider themselves smart and knowledgeable (regardless of evidence). If people can understand you, it makes them feel validated in their self-concept (and perceive you as smart as them, i.e. very smart); if they can't understand, it makes them feel stupid (hitting their self-esteem, they will take it as an insult, that you're trying to make them look bad). Since incomprehensible dialogue is indistinguishable from nonsense gibberish, then it must obviously be nonsense, and the speaker obviously a pretender. The alternative would be for them to acknowledge their own intellectual inadequacy, and that cannot happen.

Fragile egos make terrible conversation partners.

You must place the bar in the sweet spot where it is in their reach, but they still need a bit of effort, so that they don't just feel smart, but feel that you're propelling them forward aboard your intelligence bandwagon.

Spoiler

Just look at Donald Trump. His rhetoric is perfectly tailored to the audience he's addressing. To a thinking person, he sounds absolutely stupid. But to his stupid audience, he makes them feel smart and validated, and they love him for it.

Is he actually as stupid as he appears, or rather a clever fellow behind an idiot mask? In the end he gets away with what he wants.

If there's no simpler word available, it can't be wrong. This goes for 'antagonize' as far as i know.

Oppose? Be against? (Sure, some nuance is lost, to antagonize is to oppose provocatively, but it's sufficiently close. To restore the full meaning you'd have to decompress the concepts into more words than conversationally practical).

Just another facet of this: Is everyone familiar with the use of specialized language to exclude those who aren't "in the know?" I see this a lot among people who have an almost desperate need to feel part of a group, no matter how artificial. It is most noticeable, to me, among educators, who seem to use language as an opaque barrier of obfuscatory terms to thwart understanding by laymen.

You mean lawyers?

Oh definitely. Jargon and slang in all sorts of groups to define in-group and out-group. From teenage girls to drug gangs. Humans seek stability for their social status floor. The more volatile the environment, the more virulently artificial barriers will be enforced. It's an organic development weaponized to reinforce a largely unnecessary hierarchy.

Politicians love it. Too much human behaviour revolves around "optics".

Intelligentsia, priestly class, brahmin caste, knowledge worker, technocrat, academic inflation... in our deceptive information society, the appearance of knowledge has prevalence over truth.

 

[Hadoblado]

Just another facet of this: Is everyone familiar with the use of specialized language to exclude those who aren't "in the know?" I see this a lot among people who have an almost desperate need to feel part of a group, no matter how artificial. It is most noticeable, to me, among educators, who seem to use language as an opaque barrier of obfuscatory terms to thwart understanding by laymen.

It's in-grouping 101.

The most illustrative examples I can think of are academic, gaming, and specific internet communities like 4chan, but it's pretty much a universal. Back in my hometown part of the socialisation process was to shroud social mechanics with a constantly shifting lingo. New nicknames, insults, descriptors or even inflections... If you went away for a week and came back you'd inevitably be befuddled by some new term originating from some incident you weren't party to. I think it was mostly boredom to be honest, but without realising it at the time, each introduction to our culture was a hierarchical maneuver.

I think the worst ones are where it's not a new word, but a new meaning to an old word. It's insidious. The example that comes to mind is 'significance', where people can think they're keeping up because it's a common word, but actually their deeply misled as the difference between lay significance and statistical significance is very meaningful. An ignorant onlooker hears an opinion, not a standardised measure of confidence. So the lay person then shares their opinion in turn and gets laughed out the door...

 

[xbox]

It's in-grouping 101.

The most illustrative examples I can think of are academic, gaming, and specific internet communities like 4chan, but it's pretty much a universal. Back in my hometown part of the socialisation process was to shroud social mechanics with a constantly shifting lingo. New nicknames, insults, descriptors or even inflections... If you went away for a week and came back you'd inevitably be befuddled by some new term originating from some incident you weren't party to. I think it was mostly boredom to be honest, but without realising it at the time, each introduction to our culture was a hierarchical maneuver.

I think the worst ones are where it's not a new word, but a new meaning to an old word. It's insidious. The example that comes to mind is 'significance', where people can think they're keeping up because it's a common word, but actually their deeply misled as the difference between lay significance and statistical significance is very meaningful. An ignorant onlooker hears an opinion, not a standardised measure of confidence. So the lay person then shares their opinion in turn and gets laughed out the door...

yeah this is actually sadder than the "using big words" thing. Its usually a sign of being so desperate and having such low self esteem that you are unaware of how you seem to others. The entire motive of that is to make the outsider feel unwelcome and jealous but its like putting on a circus act (complete oppsite effect). Hilarious tbh. I have some relatives who behave in this manner and it is interesting to watch from a distance.

 

[Grayman]

It's okay to have some pride in your skills. If you are good with words and want to express how much you value that about yourself that is great. It is only when expressing pride becomes epressing arrogance, that I start ti get irritated. If a person believes that their skills with words makes them better than me as a person, they are full of shit and narrow minded.

 

[Yellow]

When I left the warm, fuzzy blanket of academia, I didn't even realize how "expensive" my vocabulary and general speech was. My immediate family had never said anything (they prefer big words anyway) was unusual. I got off my ivory tower and realized that most people resent that kind of speech.

The decent was gradual. First, people thought I was just being a snob. Then I started explaining words when people gave me funny looks, which made people think I was patronizing them. Then I started being aware of the words I used, but I would pause at bigger words while thinking of simpler ones. Apparently, that was also patronizing.

Then, I because a teacher, and had to use simpler words to explain larger concepts.

Years of this got me out of the habit of bigger words. Now, if I have a technical reason for using a larger, more accurate word, then I use it. Otherwise, I leave them alone. I still give off a snobby impression more than I'd like, but maybe it just means that I'm a snob.

 

[Nofriends]

when i speak i sound really condescending and pretentious, every sentence i bust out another sesquipidalian word and when they use one i criticize them for not using it correctly, i usually threaten them, that if they misuse a word again i will hunt them down.

also, if someone uses a word i do not understand i usually punch them and threaten their blood line

 

[Nofriends]

When I left the warm, fuzzy blanket of academia, I didn't even realize how "expensive" my vocabulary and general speech was. My immediate family had never said anything (they prefer big words anyway) was unusual. I got off my ivory tower and realized that most people resent that kind of speech.

The decent was gradual. First, people thought I was just being a snob. Then I started explaining words when people gave me funny looks, which made people think I was patronizing them. Then I started being aware of the words I used, but I would pause at bigger words while thinking of simpler ones. Apparently, that was also patronizing.

Then, I because a teacher, and had to use simpler words to explain larger concepts.

Years of this got me out of the habit of bigger words. Now, if I have a technical reason for using a larger, more accurate word, then I use it. Otherwise, I leave them alone. I still give off a snobby impression more than I'd like, but maybe it just means that I'm a snob.

just means u are a better human, you sound like a good wifey, judge a human not by their actions but rather their lexicon