A Plethora of Plethoras

Make sure you choose words based on their meaning and appropriateness, not on how: they sound you think they’ll make others perceive you For instance, I see the word “plethora” used all the time. “A plethora of choices!” exclaims a press release. The writer chose “plethora” because she thought it meant “an abundance of” and, perhaps, that it would make her sound smart. But “plethora” doesn’t solely mean “an abundance of,” it means, according to these dictionaries, too freakin’ many. Encarta: a very large amount of something or number of things, especially an excessive amount Compact Oxford English Dictionary: an excessive amount of Merriam-Webster: excess, superfluity Cambridge International Dictionary of English: very large amount of something, especially a larger amount than you need, want or can deal with American Heritage Dictionary: A superabundance; an excess Even if you choose a word with the right meaning, though, what my third-grade teacher at Cleveland Elementary School in Skokie, Ill., used to call “$10 words” may, in fact, work against you. In the October 2005 issue of the Journal of Applied Cognitive Psychology, Daniel Oppenheimer, now at Princeton, published an article headlined “Consequences of Erudite Vernacular Utilized Irrespective of Necessity: Problems with Using Long Words Needlessly,” which explored students’ predilection for using big words to sound intelligent. He found that while this was common behavior, it wasn’t worth the time or effort. "Anything that makes a text hard to read and understand, such as unnecessarily long words ... will lower readers' evaluations of the text and its author," he wrote, concluding, "one thing seems certain, write as simply and plainly as possible and it's more likely you'll be thought of as intelligent." And, if you are going to use a $10 word? At least look it up!

Note:
Daniel Oppenheimer won a 2006 Ig Nobel Prize for his Journal of Applied Cognitive Psychology article; Ig Nobels  - ignoble, get it? – are  awarded to honor achievements that "first make people laugh, and then make them think."

By the way, when you do come across a word that you’re not familiar with, here’s an easy way to look it up if there’s no dictionary or computer nearby. Just text message Google at 46645, write “define:” followed by the word, and send (e.g., define:calyx). You’ll get the definition text messaged in return.

Comments

[Jim Fitz]

Great posting -- very trenchant.

[Matt Caruso (The Daily Doormatt)]

"No El Guapo, I have no idea what plethora means."

Every time I hear the word I think of The Three Amigos.

Nice post.

[Joey]

Thanks, and can we throw out the word "leverage"?

[Mike Sieber]

Plethora is one word that I would like to see banned from the language along with cornucopia. I never did like them and thought they were either overused or misused.

[Dan Santow]

Matt, great “Three Amigos” reference (wish I had thought of it). Here it is:

Jefe: We have many beautiful pinatas for your birthday celebration, each one filled with little surprises!
El Guapo: How many pinatas?
Jefe: Many pinatas, many!
El Guapo: Jefe, would you say I have a plethora of pinatas?
Jefe: A what?
El Guapo: A *plethora*.
Jefe: Oh yes, El Guapo. You have a plethora.
El Guapo: Jefe, what is a plethora?
Jefe: Why, El Guapo?
El Guapo: Well, you just told me that I had a plethora, and I would just like to know if you know what it means to have a plethora. I would not like to think that someone would tell someone else he has a plethora, and then find out that that person has *no idea* what it means to have a plethora.
Jefe: El Guapo, I know that I, Jefe, do not have your superior intellect and education, but could it be that once again, you are angry at something else, and are looking to take it out on me?

Joey, “leverage” is one of those PR-centric words that also drives me crazy. If we start going down this road, though, it’ll never end (utilize, secure, garner… PR’s hit list).

Mike, “cornucopia”? I have to admit, in my almost five years at Edelman I have never seen that word used indiscriminately, or used at all except around Thanksgiving maybe. You really see it a lot? In PR-related things?

[jvm]

Before I submit the following bit of smart-assed laced wit,I want to establish that I love this blog and your posts. So, please take the following in the spirit in which it is intended.

I find it very funny that, in a post about the needless use of big words in a blog post, you wrote the following:
"...which explored students’ predilection for using big words to sound intelligent."

[Dan Santow]

JVM, point well taken. "Predilection" is definitely a $10 word.

[DigitalGhost]

There are problems much worse than $10 words. Beware of vowel movements.

Your article condensed:

Never use a large word when a diminutive one will suffice. ;)

[Ike]

JVM - you beat me to the punch. I was going to write the same thing.

[Rob]

My guess is that at least 75% of the time people use the word plethora, they are referencing Three Amigos. Use the word, and people will smile and know exactly what you mean, even without having to articulate either the reference or definition. People do not know it means excess, because they have not looked it up in the dictionary (or they looked it up 20 years ago). They only know or believe it means "many" per the movie quote.

[Vinny]

'Dimunitive'? How about small? ;)

[Renee]

publish a free newspaper for WI educators - would you be interested in sending small articles on Word Wise to our audience of teachers??? Thank you

[Chad Stuchis]

In "A Plethora of Plethoras," you quote Daniel Oppenheimer:
"Anything that makes a text hard to read and understand, such as unnecessarily long words ... will lower readers' evaluations of the text and it's author..."

Did he really use "it's" rather than "its" in this context? If so, it's quite a gaffe.

He should have used "its", without an apostrophe, because "its" is the possesive pronoun meaning "belonging to it". In contrast, "it's" is a contraction, short for "it is".

[Dan Santow]

Chad, thanks for your close reading. I stand corrected - and I've corrected the punctuation, as well. My mistake, not Daniel Oppenheimer's.