Is Funner Becoming a Word?

Today on The Next Big Idea podcast: A conversation with linguist Anne Curzan about how language evolves and why it matters. Listen on Apple or Spotify, and let's discuss in the comments below.

How do you feel about the word “funner”? Can this podcast episode be funner than the last, or maybe even the funnest?

If you are wincing right now, you’re not alone. Incorrect language usage — or usage that we perceive to be incorrect — triggers powerful emotional responses in many of us. But are they justified? Or are we just resisting the inevitable flow of language, which is, of course, a liquid not a solid.

Let me give you some examples: Benjamin Franklin was outraged by the use of colonize as a verb. Colonies, sure. But colonize? Outrageous! A disfigurement of the language.? This despite the fact that, at the time, the verb colonize had been around for 150 years.

We like to think the earth is solid beneath our feet. But the tectonic plates are always shifting. Language is the same. It’s forever in motion. New words erupt like magma. And the definitions of old words drift. Explode used to mean to drive an actor off the stage. Disappoint meant to remove from office. And to fizzle was to silently fart. These words have evolved in the direction of becoming more vague, more general… But you might say also more expansive.?

So here’s the question we should ask ourselves: Should we celebrate new language usage, as a birdwatcher delights in the sight of a new species, or should we hunt it down and kill it?

My guest this week, linguist Anne Curzan, is the author of the new book: Says Who? A Kinder, Funner Usage Guide for Everyone Who Cares About Words. Anne may be armed with highfalutin academic credentials — she’s the Dean of Literature, Science, and the Arts at the University of Michigan — but she’s a birder not a hunter. As you’ll hear, the evolution of language gives her an electric jolt. Watching colloquialisms infiltrate “standard” English tickles her pink. She’s even a fan of catachresis (a fancy Latin word to describe the willful misuse of language).?

And how about me? Am I a birder or a hunter? Well, I’ll say this: I care about linguistic precision. I delight, at times, in? le mot juste and am driven absolutely bananas by certain language usages — it pains me to see precise, beautiful words, dulled like a once-sharp kitchen knife. But Anne has convinced me, in this conversation, that I should embrace — we should embrace — a less judgmental, more open and curious approach to language. Because it’s more interesting, and playful, yes, but also because it’s a choice to use language to connect rather than to exclude. Isn’t that what it's for?

Listen on Apple or Spotify, and let's discuss in the comments below. Tell me this —?what language mistakes drive you crazy?

Glossary of Language Change Discussed in This Episode

• Fun: Primarily used as a noun but reinterpreted as an adjective in the early 20th century.
• Funner/Funnest: Often considered incorrect, but likely to become standard usage in the future, following the pattern of other one-syllable adjectives.
• Colonize: Initially criticized when used as a verb but eventually became accepted.
• Fizzle: Originally meant "to silently fart," but its meaning has shifted and expanded over time.
• Peruse: Contested word with varied usage interpretations.
• Impactful: Considered aesthetically displeasing by some due to its relatively recent popularity, but appreciated by others for offering greater impact than existing synonyms.
• Who/That: Both are now considered standard after nouns like "student," despite some historical preferences for "who" with animate nouns.
• Whom: Considered stuffy or pretentious by many and is gradually fading from common usage.
• Biweekly: The dual meaning of "twice a week" and "every two weeks" creates ambiguity and confusion.
• Imply/Infer: The distinction between "imply" (suggest) and "infer" (dedjuce) has been eroding, much to Rufus's consternation, as infer has taken on the meaning of imply as a secondary definition.
• Unique: While historically meaning "one of a kind," the word is now often used to mean "highly unusual," making comparisons of uniqueness possible.
• Decimate: Originally meaning "kill one in every ten," it now signifies widespread destruction. The original usage is no longer commonly recognized or lamented.
• Nauseous: Now commonly used synonymously with "nauseated," despite its original meaning of "causing nausea."
• Aroma: The scope of this word has expanded. It initially referred only to the scent of spices, but now encompasses a broader range of pleasant, often subtle smells.
• Wife: Originally meaning "woman" in general, it now specifically designates a married woman.
• Utilize: Often considered jargon and an unnecessarily complex synonym for "use." However, some argue it refers to the specific application of a tool or resource for a particular purpose.
• Homeless: Being replaced with "houseless" or "unhoused" in some circles. Rufus and Anne discuss the merits and liability of "euphemism treadmills."
• Data: While technically the plural form of a Latin word, it is increasingly used as a mass noun, similar to "information," leading to debates about its singular/plural usage.
• Asterisk: The pronunciation of this word varies, with some speakers swapping the "k" and "s" sounds. Notably, the swapped pronunciation (asterix) in this context does not carry the same social stigma as it does in "ask."
• Ask/Aks: "Aks" was once considered a higher form, as evidenced by its presence in Chaucer's writing. The pronunciation variation, now more common in some dialects of African American English, demonstrates how language evolves and how social perceptions can shift over time.
• On Accident: Replacing "by accident" in some usage trends, despite resistance from some language users.
• Lollygag: Currently used as a synonym for "dilly dally," but historically referred to romantic interactions like kissing.
• Recombobulate: Originating from a sign at the Milwaukee Airport, this word refers to the process of getting reorganized after a discombobulating experience.
• Intensifiers: Words like "very" and "extremely" that amplify adverbs and adjectives are a stylistic choice rather than a matter of correctness, though overuse can diminish impact.
• So: This word's increasing prevalence as both an intensifier ("so fun") and discourse marker ("So, to answer your question...") has contributed to its rising prominence as a pet peeve.
• Ums and Ahs: While often perceived as signs of ineffective communication, some experts suggest they can serve as useful discourse markers and contribute to a more relatable conversational style.

Listen on Apple or Spotify, and let's discuss in the comments below. Tell me this —?what language mistakes drive you crazy?