Mine is - Algorithm. Ever since people have learned some of the inner workings of how content is suggested to them, that became the new spammed word that easily got exhausted within the week of it being used.

Yeah, an algorithm does indeed pitch you things of what to watch or listen to. But there’s more going on than that, but people all the time just stop at that word and expect everyone to suddenly understand it. Sadly, most people just buy it at face value.

  • edric
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Corporate-speak especially on linkedin from the types of users who use it as an influencer platform. “Synergy” for example.

  • masterspaceEnglish
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    edit-2
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    When people use industry specific jargon and acronyms with someone not in their industry.

    It is a very simple rule of writing and communication. You never just use an acronym out of nowhere, you write it out in full the first time and explain the acronym, and then after that you can use it.

    Artificial diamonds can be made with a High Temperature, High Pressure (HTHP) process, or a

    Doctors, military folk, lawyers, and technical people of all variety are often awful at just throwing out an acronym or technical term that you literally have no way of knowing.

    Usually though, I don’t think it’s a conscious effort to sound smart. Sometimes, it’s just people who are used to talking only with their coworkers / inner circle and just aren’t thinking about the fact that you don’t have the same context, sometimes it’s people who are feeling nervous / insecure and are subconsciously using fancy terms to sound like they fit in, and sometimes it’s people using specific terminology to hide the fact that they don’t actually understand the concepts well enough to break them down further.

    • vrekEnglish
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      I do this alot but I alway follow up with “Do you know what blah is? and depending on age/experience/acronym or term I ask them to explain it.

      Sometimes I get assigned work with a senior engineer(where I learn) and sometimes I get asked to help a new person. For example right now I’m in a project being driven by a senior engineer but was asked to assist a professional development program employee(or pdp) to actually execute the project. As a result this is the habit I developed to 1. Make sure I don’t confuse people with random acronyms or terms 2. Ensure we are on the same regarding definition(and they are not just saying yes I know when they don’t).

  • TheAlbatross
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Milieu

    Pastiche

    That’s all I can remember now, I gotta ambulate my way over to the kitchen and make some coffee.

  • jetEnglish
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    edit-2
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    I think the common goal is not to sound smart, but add variety and diversity to the language, so it doesn’t sound so boring.

    example https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken

    This gets really boring and repetitive

  • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Right now, “demure”.

    My boss, specifically: “stonefruit”.

    • Glide
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      Alright, I’ll bite: what exactly is a “stonefruit” in this context? Google just says “fruits with large seeds that are basically rocks in the middle”, which I suspect is not the pseudo-intellectual flex your boss is going for?

      • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        1 month ago
        link
        fedilink

        No, that’s it. But it’s every single wine she tastes. They don’t all have stonefruit notes!

        • NauticalNoodle
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          edit-2
          1 month ago
          link
          fedilink

          Peach, plum, cherry, apricot, pluot and it goes on extensively. There are lots of different stonefruits out there all with very different flavors.

          Tangentially related there’s an artist that has been trying to make a tree with the most diverse number of storefruit producing branches grafted onto it.

          A Tree Grows 40 Different Types of Fruit

          • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            1 month ago
            link
            fedilink

            Sure, but she just says “stonefruits”, not any specific one. shrug

        • Che Banana
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          link
          fedilink

          Lol. Grapes. Wine smells like grapes.

          It is a great experience to have someone explain to you what you should smell, taste, etc. when you are drinking a wine varietal, but apart from that everything else is just fluff & marketing.

          • yngmnwntr
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            1 month ago
            link
            fedilink

            I work in the grape wine industry but at home I make fruit wines. I always crack up when someone says this grape wine tastes like cherries or blueberry.

            • howrar
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              1 month ago
              link
              fedilink

              That’s the fun thing about food (and wine especially). You don’t need to have the ingredient present for it to taste like that ingredient. I made chocolate chip cookies once that tasted like bananas, and I most definitely didn’t add bananas to them.

    • howrar
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      I’ve never seen anyone use “demure” in a serious context. It seems to always be used to convey a mocking tone.

  • TheImpressiveX
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Krusty: So he’s proactive, huh?

    Network Executive Lady: Oh, God, yes. We’re talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.

    Writer: Excuse me, but “proactive” and “paradigm”? Aren’t these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important? Not that I’m accusing you of anything like that [pause] I’m fired, aren’t I?

    Roger Meyers, Jr.: Oh, yes. [gets up to leave] The rest of you writers start thinking up a name for this funky dog - I don’t know, something along the lines of, say, “Poochie”, only more proactive!

    Krusty: Yeah!

    The Simpsons S08E14 “The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show”

  • DiddlydeeEnglish
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Per se. Vis a vis. Erudite. Juxtaposition. Elucidate.

    • masterspaceEnglish
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      For each of these, what would you use instead?

      • BougieBirdieEnglish
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago
        link
        fedilink

        I’ll take a crack at this one. For what it’s worth, I think the first couple are just loanwords from another language which sometimes gets used incorrectly, and the last three are uncommon words in conversation. Know your audience.


        “This isn’t a meeting about the budget per se

        “This isn’t exactly a meeting about the budget”


        “The victim met their demise vis a vis poodle attack”

        “The victim met their demise by way of poodle attack.


        “Steve’s a real erudite.

        “Steve’s a real reader.


        “Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the juxtaposition of the relationship between cat and mouse.

        “Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the oppositeness of the relationship between cat and mouse”


        “I don’t understand, can you elucidate on that?

        “I don’t understand, can you explain?

        • entropicdrift
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          link
          fedilink

          Vis a vis is used in an uncommon way here. It typically means “in relation to”, “compared with” or “regarding”

          “The poodle needs more grooming vis a vis most other breeds of dog”

          “The poodle needs more grooming compared to most other breeds of dog”

          The use of erudite is slightly wrong. It’s an adjective meaning knowledgeable, but you used it like a noun.

          “Steve is really erudite”

          “Steve is really well-read”

          • BougieBirdieEnglish
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            1 month ago
            link
            fedilink

            I genuinely thought erudite was a noun. Thanks, TIL

            • entropicdrift
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              1 month ago
              link
              fedilink

              Happy to help! I love uncommon words and love to see them used correctly

        • masterspaceEnglish
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          edit-2
          1 month ago
          link
          fedilink

          “This isn’t a meeting about the budget per se”

          “This isn’t exactly a meeting about the budget”

          If you finish those sentences, it becomes clear why per se is used:

          “This isn’t a meeting about the budget per se, it’s a meeting about how much of the budget is spent on bits of string”

          “This isn’t exactly a meeting about the budget, it’s a meeting about how much of the budget is spent on bits of string”

          In this situation, using per se provides a more natural sentence flow because it links the first part of the sentence with the second. It’s also shorter and fewer syllables.

          “Steve’s quite erudite.

          “Steve’s quite intellectual.

          I think intellectual might be a closer synonym, but intellectual often has more know-it-all connotations than erudite which seems to often refer to a more pure and cerebral quality.

          “Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the juxtaposition of the relationship between cat and mouse.

          “Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the side by side oppositeness of the relationship between cat and mouse that is displayed

          For those to say precisely the same thing it would have to be more like the above which doesn’t really roll off the tongue.

          “I don’t understand, can you elucidate that?

          “I don’t understand, can you explain?

          Elucidate just means to make something clear in general, explaining something usually inherently implies a linguistic, verbal, explanation, unless otherwise stated.

          Honestly, these all seem like very reasonable words to me for the most part. I can understand not using them in some contexts, but for the most part, words exist for a reason, to describe something slightly differently, and it takes forever to talk and communicate if we only limit ourselves to the most basic unnuanced terms.

    • Alice
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      Oh shit, I picked up “per se” from Animal Crossing as a kid and never questioned it.

      In my defense, Rover is a fucking weirdo, you’d never use a phrase you learned from him to try to sound smart.

      • Mesa
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        28 days ago
        link
        fedilink

        (Most of these are pretty normal words to use and you shouldn’t make a conscious effort to avoid them because some guy on the internet thinks you’re pretentious.)

        • Alice
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          28 days ago
          link
          fedilink

          Lol fair. I got insecure for a second because I used to get mistaken for a snob when I was actually just terrible at wording things.

    • howrar
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      link
      fedilink

      This one amuses me. It looks all fancy in writing. But if someone says “milk toast” and you don’t know what it means, they just sound like an idiot.

  • apotheotic (she/her)English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Maybe a slight tangent, but it drives me insane when I see/hear people do the following in scripted or written content.

    The normal, very casual sentence structure could be “Chocolate cake, which I am quite partial to but they will flip it around, which is usually fine, but they do it in a way that doesn’t make sense with the words used. They’ll do something like “Chocolate cake, of which I am quite partial to”. (Where the correct rearrangement would be “to which I am quite partial”)

    I know its nitpicky because I can still perfectly understand their meaning, but it feels like people do it because they want to sound smarter. And that’s fine! I just wish they’d go that tiny step further and learn how to properly use that method of sentence rearrangement! Drives me nuts.

    That is all.

  • addmen
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    Irregardless not a word.

  • Amerikan Pharaoh
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    edit-2
    1 month ago
    link
    fedilink

    “Whataboutism” (a term for that already existed; it’s called “getting called on your hypocritical bullshit”), “disinformation” (this term is literally just the BlueAnon answer to the MAGAt’s “fake news”), jesus christ “fallacy” especially (Merely calling out a fallacy like you’re an NFL ref at the Super Bowl is the same kind of sophistry as the fallacy you address if you’re not gonna spend the time to dismantle it).