{"id":1288,"date":"2012-02-07T10:19:08","date_gmt":"2012-02-07T18:19:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.danamackenzie.com\/blog\/?p=1288"},"modified":"2012-02-07T10:22:55","modified_gmt":"2012-02-07T18:22:55","slug":"not-so-thinly","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/?p=1288","title":{"rendered":"&#8220;Not so Thinly&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I&#8217;m going to go off-topic today to post a little gripe about language. As you know, I&#8217;m a writer, so it pains me to see words used to mean things that they aren&#8217;t supposed to mean!<\/p>\n<p>I read an article this morning with a subhead: &#8220;Conservatives criticize automaker&#8217;s Super Bowl ad as a thinly veiled endorsement of the federal government&#8217;s auto bailouts.&#8221; That subhead is CORRECT (linguistically; I&#8217;m not talking about the content). It means what the writer meant to say.<\/p>\n<p>However, the <a href=\"http:\/\/wnyt.com\/article\/stories\/s2485107.shtml?cat=300\" target=\"_blank\">body of the article<\/a> says, in paragraph four, &#8220;Conservatives&#8230; criticized the ad as a not-so-thinly veiled endorsement&#8230;&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Well, which is it? Thinly veiled or not-so-thinly veiled? Here&#8217;s a clue. Not-so-thinly veiled means THICKLY veiled, and that is NOT what the writer meant to say!<\/p>\n<p>I think that the writer was conflating two phrases: &#8220;thinly veiled&#8221; and &#8220;not-so-veiled.&#8221; And he figured that if he put them together, then it makes it stronger. A &#8220;long long road&#8221; is longer than a &#8220;long road.&#8221; But the word &#8220;not&#8221; doesn&#8217;t work that way. &#8220;Not not veiled&#8221; does not mean &#8220;even less veiled.&#8221; It means veiled!<\/p>\n<p>However, it turns out that this hapless Associated Press writer has a whole lot of company. A Google search for &#8220;thinly veiled&#8221; produces 3.8 million hits. A search for &#8220;not-so-thinly veiled&#8221; comes up with 1.6 million hits! Since &#8220;thinly veiled&#8221; should count these, too, we can infer that the number of times people wrote the correct &#8220;thinly veiled&#8221; is actually only 2.2 million. In other words, the correct phrase is barely more common than the incorrect one. Just for an example, a poker player named Change100 posts<a href=\"http:\/\/potcommitted.blogspot.com\/2010\/12\/not-so-thinly-veiled-brag.html\" target=\"_blank\"> this entry<\/a> called &#8220;A Not-So-Thinly Veiled Brag&#8221; about her first big tournament success, which is actually a thinly veiled brag or perhaps a not-veiled brag.<\/p>\n<p>Really, there&#8217;s a bigger language moral behind all of this. The problem is that both &#8220;thinly veiled&#8221; and &#8220;not-so-thinly veiled&#8221; are clich\u00c3\u00a9s. When a phrase become a clich\u00c3\u00a9, people stop thinking about what it means and how it came to have that meaning. Therefore, my broader message is: Don&#8217;t use clich\u00c3\u00a9s! (Please.) Think about what you&#8217;re writing and try to say it in a different way from everybody else.<\/p>\n<p>Thanks. End of rant, end of off-topic post.<\/p>\n<p>P.S. I accidentally clicked &#8220;publish&#8221; before I had finished writing the last paragraph, so if anybody out there got the not-quite-finished version, sorry about that!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I&#8217;m going to go off-topic today to post a little gripe about language. As you know, I&#8217;m a writer, so it pains me to see words used to mean things that they aren&#8217;t supposed to mean! I read an article this morning with a subhead: &#8220;Conservatives criticize automaker&#8217;s Super Bowl ad as a thinly veiled [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":80,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1363,235,171],"tags":[2101,2102,2100,256,2103],"class_list":["post-1288","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-news","category-off-topic","category-ruminations","tag-cliches","tag-conflation","tag-language","tag-mistakes","tag-rants"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1288","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/80"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1288"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1288\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1288"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1288"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/danamackenzie.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1288"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}