Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Member |
I haven't posted anything from QT in awhile. I found this piece in today's column rather interesting. He wonders just how ubiquitous "ubiquitous" is! Here are some ways he has seen it used. Would you say they are all correct? "...ragweed is ubiquitous... "...distractions from the television or the ubiquitous computer..." "...overshadowed here by the ubiquitous SUV..." "...the absence of the ubiquitous Tiger Woods..." "...trumpeter who has become ubiquitous on the local scene." | ||
|
<Asa Lovejoy> |
The last two don't ring true to me. How can one person be in many places at once, quantum theory notwithstanding. | ||
Member |
Honestly, I don't think any of those are a good usage of the term ubiquitous. http://www.dictionary.com has this to say
First, "an ubiquitous" cannot be correct, at least not in American English, and I don't think the Brits mangle the language that much. I would say "ragweed is everywhere", but ubiquitous? This seems like trying to use a fancy word when not needed. How is the computer ubiquitous and not the television? Sure, there are lots of SUVs, but there are lots of Hondas too. 5 years ago I would say, "soccer moms and their ubiquitous minivans", but SUVs just aren't that overwhelming popular. Of course, I'm in Texas, so I might speak of the ubiquitous pick-up truck, but only to be a northern elitist. Certainly "the absence of the ubiquitous..." is an oxymoron. The last one isn't so bad. A popular musician who seems to be at all the shows fits the definition fairly well. I wouldn't say it like that, even being a trumpet player myself, but it isn't too bad. | |||
|
Member |
--The ubiquitous Mr. Holt, a man with astonishingly large breasts, would be well advised to seek out the services of a good nutritionist. | |||
|
<Asa Lovejoy> |
Or a good endocrinologist!!! | ||
Member |
Do vegans breastfeed? | |||
|
Member |
A little cross-threading?
I missed that quote from the OED; leave it to CJ to point it out! It really is a bit strange, isn't it? I'd like to see it in context! | |||
|
Member |
Here it is in context, which doesn't help much. Apparently "convalescing" is the best translation. Unassisted, he was practicing Florence Nightengale's profession in DIY mode. | |||
|
Member |
I think Tiger Woods can be thought of, in a metaphorical sense, as ubiquitous on the golf scene - a current tournament is unimaginable without him. Words used metaphorically are not words used incorrectly. The last one rings false to me, too - but only because I don't think it is factually correct. I believe the writer is exaggerating for effect and the effect falls flat. Beth J | |||
|
Member |
Welcome to our forum, Beth! Yes, you make a good point about using the word metaphorically. Jerry, thanks for finding the context! For those of you who don't want to read the whole paper to find it, here is the context. I agree, Jerry, it doesn't help much! "For ages past, I know how old men preach, and what young men practise; and that patriarchs have had their weak moments too, long since Father Noah toppled over after discovering the vine. Frank went off, then, to his pleasures at Bruxelles, in which capital many young fellows of our army declared they found infinitely greater diversion even than in London: and Mr. Henry Esmond remained in his sick-room, where he writ a fine comedy, that his mistress pronounced to be sublime, and that was acted no less than three successive nights in London in the next year. Here, as he lay nursing himself, ubiquitous Mr. Holt reappeared, and stopped a whole month at Mons, where he not only won over Colonel Esmond to the King's side in politics (that side being always held by the Esmond family); but where he endeavored to reopen the controversial question between the churches once more, and to recall Esmond to that religion in which, in his infancy, he had been baptized." | |||
|
Member |
This is definitely true. When he is in danger of missing the cut and not lasting to the last days of a tournament, the news coverage is intensive, to say the least. Sometimes, we must be careful about what we consider incorrect. Things which appear incorrect might be metaphoric, exaggeration, or even sarcastic. Stephen Pinker gives the example of "I ain't doing nothing", which appears to be a double negative. However, since this is sarcastic, it is completely valid. Sarcasm is especially prevalent amongst my generation. It takes people a long time to learn whether or not I'm being sarcastic, and often the only way to know is actually knowing what I think about whatever I just spoke about. Sometimes, I use completely incorrect syntax, pronunciation, and generally break the rules of the English language, but do so in a sarcastic manner. Sometimes people correct me in such cases, and I often don't know how to respond. The best line, of course, is from the Simpsons, who use and joke about sarcasm extensively. Teenager: Oh look, the cannonball guy, he's cool. Another Teenager: Are you being sarcastic, dude? Teenager: I don't even know anymore. | |||
|
Member |
Mention of the ubiquitous Tiger Woods reminded me of a short article I saw recently in my local evening paper. Apparently Tiger is losing money because he receives so much TV coverage. The PGA (?) fines golfers if they are caught swearing on TV after a bad shot, and apparently Tiger is quite prone to let out the odd expletive; because he tends to be followed by TV all the way round the course, he has had to pay a lot of fines. Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. | |||
|
Member |
Well, he is American, isn't he? I suspect we have a higher rate of swearing than other nations, though I don't have the data to support that (in case Richard should ask! ). "Odd expletive"? I am not sure what that means. | |||
|
Member |
I believe odd is being used in this context meaning "random". It is a strange expression, but that's what I assume when I hear it. | |||
|
Member |
It's common to use 'odd' in that sense over here. Another US/UK difference, perhaps? | |||
|
<Asa Lovejoy> |
I use it, and it looks perfectly normal to me. But then, I'm not perfectly normal, so ... | ||
Member |
Having read this last night, I was prepared when a word-puzzle I was doing called for a 10-letter word meaning 'omnipresent'. Confidently, I wrote in 'ubiquitous'. Uh, no. Turns out that the word they wanted was 'everywhere'. It just goes to show you, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. | |||
|
Member |
I love it when you quote great classics, Sean. Excellent reference. I always thought people of my age and younger in the UK swore more often than the US people of the same generations I know. I suspect that all nations have similar percentages of swearing amongst similarly aged people. But dammit, who the hell cares? Where I work, the swearing amongst our customers is ubiquitous. We kick them out, though, if we hear them. My staff has had to threaten (promise?) me with kicking me out for my language from time to time. ******* "Happiness is not something ready made. It comes from your own actions. ~Dalai Lama | |||
|
Member |
I think I must have a "Miss Goodie Two Shoes" reputation around my place because when I slip and say something rather unprofessional , I always get that shocked look! | |||
|
Member |
Of course, it is the word "ubiquitous" that started this thread - and from the discussions back then I would suspect the swearing is not ubiquitous, even in the most rowdy of libraries. Only if all the customers swore, all the time, and there were customers present all the time, could swearing be ubiquitous. I would say that it's more likely to be "common" than ubiquitous. Richard English | |||
|
Member |
You're right, of course, Richard. Sigh. But it SEEMS ubiquitous. Isn't "seems to be everywhere" part of the definition? Oh - I was reading the definition incorrectly (imagine that!). ******* "Happiness is not something ready made. It comes from your own actions. ~Dalai Lama | |||
|
Member |
Oh, I do that all the time, CW. Just tonight I found a Washington Post article on Google about "gravitas," and I misunderstood the author's statement, making a long post predicated on my misunderstanding. When I realized my mistake, I had to delete the whole post, which probably took me about a half an hour. At least, though, I deleted it before the eagle-eyed Wordcrafters saw it. | |||
|