I am literarily offended by the abuse of the language when one calls something by something other that what the names really says.
I entreat people to analyze what they are saying and convert it into a more accurate and informative statement.
INFLAMMABLE!
An example of biting the bullet occurred a number years ago
when the chemists of the world agreed to abandon the word inflammable, whose meaning was supposed to
mean "to inflame", that it could catch on fire. The literal interpretation means in-flammable,
equivalent to non-flammable, the exact opposite and a potential great hazard.
But unfortunately the word is still there when one says
that someone is "making inflammatory statements".
That one was easy, the problem is so obvious.
But there are others and it bothers me that no one stands up and says, "Enough, I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
Perhaps I'm over-reacting.
But if you have candidate words, send them to me and I'll
try to see your point and place them here!
The first word below is an egregious attempt to provide
comforting misinformation.
Send me your candidates!
NEAR MISS!
There is no such thing as a "Near Miss". A "Near Miss" is a
"hit".
It is really a "Hit" but that's frightening. We can't tell
the truth here. We have to collect this lousy data but we mustn't frighten the populace, the
hoi polloi in the process!
And then there is the other kind of misapprehension, the question that does not want the real answer. Chief among these, for me, is the questions "Do you have the time?" The answer to this is , "To do what?" But the answer people give is , "Yes, it is two twenty (for example).
What the question should have been was something like, "What time is it?"
And now I invite you to send me those lapses of communication that madden you!
I may not be "mad as hell" but I am considerably discombobulated that we accept such garbage. "I'm Charles E. Dills and I am considerably perturbed!" with apologies to the movie this was adapted from.