End this word: ‘Gubernatorial’
Steve Safran September 30th, 2006
Because we’re supposed to write conversationally, I wonder why we stick to some choices that are clearly not conversational. As we approach the fall elections, ask yourself this: when was the last time you heard the word “gubernatorial” come up in a conversation? “Hey, Ted! Who do you like in the gubernatorial election?” “I don’t know, Stan, but that gubernatorial race is sure shaping up nicely!” Nonsense. We say governor. We say governor’s race. We say race for governor. Let’s take the goober out of gubernatorial.
18 Comments Add your own
1. McChris | September 30th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
I would say, “Hey, Ted! Whom do you like in the gubernatorial election?”
2. Steve Safran | September 30th, 2006 at 4:12 pm
And then Ted would smack you.
3. aidian | September 30th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Issue is gramatically correct versus conversational, and it comes up all the time. Governor’s race suggests the governor is running a marathon. Gubernatorial suggests you’re a geek. Be a little creative, and you can usually write around it.
4. Charles | September 30th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
And let’s not call it a Presidential race. Let’s call it a President’s race!
Sure, it may not be kosher with our very laid-back, contemporary english, but anybody who actually cares about who’s running for governor will know *exactly* what Gubernatorial means.
We don’t need to dumb EVERYTHING down to MTV-level. There’s still a role in our socialcultural climate for big words. ^_^
5. Chris Rooney | September 30th, 2006 at 7:10 pm
Amen, Steve! I will go to whatever lengths needed to avoid using that word when I’m writing.
6. Safran | September 30th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
I don’t see the problem with writing in “contemporary English.” There’s a tendency to romanticize the old - excuse me, “olde” - but language evolves. (Not that *anyone* ever used “gubernatorial.”)
Language evolves, and thank goodness. We don’t speak English the way that was considered proper at the start of the 20th century. And I’m sure the “thee” and “thou” speakers of the 17th century would be horrified by our use of the familiar “you” forms.
English has, depending on who you believe and how you count them, between 500,000 and a million words. That makes it, far and away, the language with the most words. Hardly one for dummies. And hardly one that will be “dumbed down” by subtracting a word from TV newswriting that nobody uses.
7. Frank Catalano | October 1st, 2006 at 8:07 am
While we’re at it, let’s nuke a word that’s frequently used in broadcasting that is not actually a word: Senatorial.
It’s Senate.
As in “Senate race,” not “Senatorial race.” This is a textbook example of someone taking a real word (”Senator”) and adding letters to it, forgetting that the word “Senate” is the right one.
8. Lee | October 1st, 2006 at 12:18 pm
Not to get off the mark, because I happen to agree with Safran on this, but the American Heritage Dictionary says that not only is senatorial a word, but so is senatorially. Doesn’t mean you should write either one into your copy though.
American Heritage Dictionary
sen·a·to·ri·al (sn-t�r-l, -tr-) adj.
1. Of, concerning, or befitting a senator or senate.
2. Composed of senators.
sena·tori·al·ly adv.
9. thewashingtonchannel | October 1st, 2006 at 1:21 pm
also, senatorial describes the occupation which many republican candidates will hold following this next election; a janitorial position combined with the prestige of having been a senator in the past.
10. Frank Catalano | October 1st, 2006 at 2:45 pm
I stand corrected.
My Webster’s Unabridged Second Edition (1948) also lists senatorial as a proper word, giving examples such as “senatorial duties” or “senatorial dignity.”
I should have checked first. (And I know this isn’t simply because dictionaries are more descriptive than proscriptive of language these days.) My error; that’s what I get for dashing off a comment before coffee.
However, I’m a huge fan of using a simpler word rather than more complex one if the simpler word will do in conversation. “Senate race” and “Governor’s race” both have that conversational simplicity going for them.
11. Tim | October 1st, 2006 at 6:01 pm
It’s too close to Goobernatatorial - having to do with Gomer’s cousin’s swimming - so could cause confusion. And these days, we know the voters are so easily confused - “Let’s see… shall I vote for the Republicans who claim to have democratic ideas, or the Democrats who believe in republican ideals?” No wonder so many of them tend to just memorize one word “incumbent” and one phrase “vote against”
12. El Dangeroso | October 1st, 2006 at 7:43 pm
If we truly wrote conversationally, we’d use the word “like” every third word.
That’s how the kids speak these days.
13. Frank Catalano | October 1st, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Um, like, that’s how the kids have spoken since the 1970s.
14. Anonymous | October 2nd, 2006 at 5:35 am
too much weed in the 60’s?
15. Mark SHepherd | October 2nd, 2006 at 11:30 am
I believe it was Linda Ellerbee who once wrote “Even Gubernators” don’t say “Gubernatorial.”
16. mediaburn | October 3rd, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Contemporary english has its place, but an all-out ban?
It doesn’t hurt for people to hear the one proper word that that sums the entire event up–at least once in a while–rather than having to rewrite entire sentences to sound “forced conversational…”
17. Sam | January 18th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Wow, thanks for the excellent information!
18. 507c1559065c&hellip | May 10th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
507c1559065c…
507c1559065c0abd1fbe…
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed