Thursday, 23 October 2014

Definitely or Definately?

This word was formed from Latin definitus, the past participle of the verb definire ‘to bind, limit’.  It was first adopted into English in the 16th century to mean ‘in a definite manner, precisely’.  It has always been spelled definitely, and our 16th century ancestors would be surprised to learn that, according to a survey reported in The Daily Record in June 2009, definitely is ‘definately the most misspelled word in the English language’.  Despite being in widespread use, the misspelling definately comes in for considerable scorn.  The Urban Dictionary has a separate entry for definately, which it defines as: ‘Idiot-speak for “definitely”.  One of the most common moronic misspellings found on the Internet’.  And just to make absolutely clear the kind of people with whom the spelling is associated, the following example is offered: ‘The new Backstreet Boys CD is, like, definately the best thing ever’.  
Spelling Trouble performing with the boys

One anonymous pedant feels so strongly about the correct spelling of this word that he has set up a website with the URL: which simply states: ‘The correct spelling is definitely. Not definately. Not definatly. Not definantly. Not definetly. Not definently. And certainly not defiantly. The correct spelling is definitely.’  The website includes a Frequently Asked Questions page which is similarly to the point.  There is just one question: ‘Are you sure?’, which receives the predictable response: ‘Definitely’.  Unfortunately for this lone orthographic crusader, he has an evil twin who has set up an alternative website with the domain name:, which assures its readers that the correct spelling is definately.  The page offers a single sample sentence, which cleverly hints at the bogus nature of the advice being offered: ‘You definately shouldn’t believe everything you read on the Internet’.  He might have added that, if you really want to know how to spell the word, try checking a dictionary.  Despite these helpful websites, the misspelling is common on Twitter too; my all-time favourite definately tweet comes in response to the question ‘Does Spelling Still Matter?’: ‘Yes, definately’. 

Thursday, 4 September 2014

Affect or effect?

Although these are two separate words, their similar spellings and senses mean that they are commonly confused.  The reason they are so similar is that they share closely related origins – affect is from Latin ad+facere ‘to try to’ and effect is from Latin ex+facere ‘to make happen’.  Ever since their first appearance in English in the Middle Ages the spelling of these two words has been confused; this confusion can even be traced back to medieval French, from which the words were borrowed into English.  It was only in the 19th century that our standard spelling practices for these words were established.  The basic rule today is that effect is the correct spelling of the noun, meaning ‘result’, ‘consequence’, and affect is the correct spelling of the verb, meaning ‘influence, make a difference to’.  That’s not quite the whole story though, since Modern English does have a verb to effect, meaning ‘to produce, accomplish, or bring about’, as in ‘effect change’, or ‘effect a reconciliation’, but this word is much less common than the noun.  There is also a noun affect, meaning ‘emotion, desire’,  but this tends to be restricted to technical contexts.  So, if in doubt, you can stick to the general rule that affect is the verb and effect is the noun.
            Advice on how to avoid confusing these words is offered by numerous style guides.  H.W. Fowler is characteristically brusque in dismissing any difficulty in distinguishing these two words, although I can’t help feeling that his definition of affect would have been clearer if he’d avoided using effect: ‘produce an effect on, concern, effect a change in’.  The Guardian Style Guide is more willing to acknowledge the problem, and more modest in its ambitions: ‘Exhortations in Guardian Style have had little effect on the number of mistakes; the level of mistakes has been little affected by our exhortations; we hope to effect a change in this’.  Searching the newspaper’s website suggests that the Guide has not been as effective as it might have hoped. 

There are numerous websites offering guidance on the correct use of these words, although the advice on offer can be rather confusing, or downright contradictory.  That such blogs are not always helpful is apparent from one example where a reader has commented: ‘This article was very affective’.   This gives rise to a lengthy discussion about whether this should be affective or effective, with no resolution.  Having failed to find clear guidance after turning to such sites, James Napoli of the Huffington Post opted to hedge his bets: ‘To put it another way, what you said was very effecting. Although it may also have been affecting. Either way, it was certainly as impactful as they come’. 

Tuesday, 26 August 2014

Mute point or moot point?

The phrase moot point derives from the Old English word moot, which referred to a judicial assembly or court.  In the 16th century it applied to hypothetical cases that were used by law students as part of their training.  Despite falling out of favour in the early 20th century, the holding of moots, where such cases were debated, has been re-introduced into the Inns of Court and University Law Schools.  The phrase moot point derives directly from this usage, and so means a point that is doubtful, debatable and open to argument.  The first occurrence of the phrase recorded by the OED is from L. Humphrey’s Nobles or of Nobilitye (1563):That they be not forced to sue the lawe, wrapped with so infinite crickes and moot poyntes’. 

Spelling Trouble delivers his verdict

Because moot is not known outside legal circles, the phrase is often mistakenly reanalysed as mute point, although at present the number of correct uses appears to outweigh the erroneous ones.  The Oxford Corpus has 1253 instances of moot point and 31 of mute point.  There are just 5 examples of mute point on the BBC website.  So it seems as if the phrase moot point remains well established, and that the misspelling mute point is a minor variant, albeit one which sneaks into published journalism.  An article in the Daily Express in July 2013, discussing rumoured football transfers, suggests that ‘Whether Napoli’s interest is concrete or not now seems like a mute point’.  Those who make this mistake are harshly criticised by the twitterati.  One tweeter allows the error to speak for itself, laconically tweeting of the former baseball player, manager and now TV pundit: ‘Larry Bowa thinks it’s “mutepoint, not “moot” point. Of course he does.’
As with similar errors, those prone to the slip are often able to provide a rational justification for the form they prefer.  According to its supporters, a mute point is a point that cannot be discussed and so must remain silent.  This sounds reasonable until we recall that the definition of a moot point is one that is debatable and therefore must be discussed; moot point therefore means precisely the opposite of mute point.  An alternative explanation is offered by Urban Dictionary, which defines mute point as one made via conference call when your phone is on silent; it offers the sample sentence: ‘It was ten minutes before Robert realized that the eloquent argument he made was actually a mute point’.

            An alternative reanaylsis of moot point was coined by the intellectually-challenged Joey Tribbiani in the US sit-com Friends.  In a scene in which Joey advises his friend Rachel about her love life, they have the following exchange:
Joey:  All right, Rach. The big question is, “does he like you?” All right? Because if he doesn’t like you, this is all a moo point.
Rachel: Huh. A moo point?
Joey: Yeah, it’s like a cow’s opinion. It just doesn't matter. It’s moo.

For Joey the phrase is perfectly logical, although, like the explanation of mute point, it has a very different meaning from the original moot point.  But it does come close to an American use of moot, meaning ‘having no practical value’, ‘irrelevant’, which derives from the idea that a point invented purely for the sake of discussion has no practical purpose.   Even Rachel finds herself persuaded by Joey’s bogus etymologizing, much to her surprise and concern.  She turns to the others and asks ‘Have I been living with him too long, or did all that just make sense?’  The popularity of the programme, combined with the amusing image it conjures up of cows voicing opinions only to have them ignored, means that moo point is in widespread use today, although always with a nod to the source to ensure the error is not attributed to its user.

Monday, 4 August 2014

Ukulele or Ukelele?

An article published in The Guardian on 27 July by the paper’s crossword editor Hugh Stephenson recounts how the use of alternative spellings by crossword setters provokes letters from incensed solvers questioning his literacy, and even his fitness to run a whelk stall.  Stephenson defends such orthographic licence by referring to legitimate alternative spellings in dictionaries such as the Oxford English Dictionary and Chambers - the cruciverbalist’s ultimate authority. Having listed some examples, Stephenson concludes: ‘And don’t get me going on the many, many “correct” spellings of Ukulele!’  This heartfelt plea refers to a controversial clue of 2003 which gave the answer ukelele rather than the standard spelling ukulele, unleashing a ‘torrent of abuse’ from disgruntled solvers.  This made me wonder: how many correct spellings of ukulele are there?

Spelling Trouble entertains the troops with his ukulele

The origins of the ukulele lie in a Hawaiian development of an instrument introduced to the island by the Portuguese in the late 19th century.  The name is derived from the Hawaiian words uku ‘flea’ and lele ‘jumping’; since its introduction into English both ukelele and ukulele have been in frequent use.  Modern dictionaries prefer the ukulele spelling, but accept ukelele as an alternative – both are listed in OED and Chambers.  But what of these numerous additional spellings alluded to by Stephenson?  In an article of 2004, Stephenson claims that OED offers ukalele and eukaleli as acceptable variants, but this isn’t strictly true.  Both spellings appear within quotations listed under the entry, but neither is given as an  optional variant under the headword – as is the case with ukelele.  The first of these, ukalele, is found in a quotation from A Damsel in Distress by P.G. Wodehouse (1919); modern editions of the novel now adopt the standard spelling ukulele.  The second appears in a quotation from Rupert Brooke’s poem Waikiki (1914): ‘Somewhere an eukaleli thrills and cries.’  Neither is cited from a work by a modern author; on this showing, neither could be considered acceptable in modern usage.
Despite this, there are are many examples of ukalele on websites and social media, most commonly accompanying painful recordings uploaded to YouTube by hopeful ukalele artists (I’m tempted to advise that, if you can’t spell it, you shouldn’t play it). The eukaleli spelling is much less common, although one tweeter labels it - rather hopefully I feel - the ‘hipster’s spelling’ (Do hipsters really play ukuleles?)  Searching online turns up a number of additional alternatives - ukealaylay is my personal favourite – but I shudder to think how The Guardian’s solvers would react to finding that in their crosswords.