Chawlk

1. Drawar
2. Fenxy
3. Decaflon
4. Two Credits
5. Wriging
6. Loose Suits
7. Chixe
8. Dud3s
9. Wing Colors

 

Vocabulary certainly isn't the "be all, end all" of intelligence. As a matter of fact, I'm usually more impressed with a person who can convey a point without forcing his audience to dig out a dictionary.

I can't remember who said "Any scientist who can't explain what he's doing to a five year old is a charlatan." but I think that sentiment sums up how I feel about that book. (I'm too lazy to look up the quote, but thats a pretty close approximation)

Dictionaries should document the words being used by people, not be the rule book for what words you need to use.

I'm definitely of the opinion that good communication is being understood by other people and not needlessly putting rarely used words in the sentence. In fact, if it looks like the person is over using rarely used words I begin to think they're an elitist toss-pot!

A lot of those words are ridiculous. I fail to see how the average college graduate could possibly make any use of the word "antebellum." Unless they're a History major, which most college graduates or not. A lot of the words seem to be like that, in fact.

"Mitosis" -- any biologists in the house?
"Lexicon" -- English majors then?
"Hypotenuse" -- Maths majors?
"Filibuster" -- Politics?

The average person has little use for those words, and quite a few others in the list.

Then there's the words like "jejune" (what's wrong with "boring"?) and "loquacious" (wait, you meant "wordy" or "chatty", right?) that no one uses unless they're trying too hard to be pretentious.

I take your pointless list of polysyllabic words and offer you this monosyllabic response: Shut the hell up. (Ironic how I used a word with 5 syllables to mock a list of polysyllabic words, huh?)

If you are able to use these words correctly, you are likely to have a superior command of the language.

Bullshit. If you know the basic rules of syntax and grammar, you already have an edge over a growing percentage of the population. Your vocabulary is of little consequence when it comes to measuring your grasp of the English (or any other) language. Almost every word on that list has a perfectly acceptable one or two syllable equivalent.

If you want a superior grasp of the English language, go read a Linguistics textbook, not a dictionary.

(That said, it does have a few of my favourite words on it. I'm nothing but a walking contradiction.)

I try and avoid people of all ages and all professions who use big words to explain something. I automatically do not trust them (the words and the person). I figure an idea or an opinion said out loud should be in words easily understood by all. I save the professional jargon for written form only.

Words - the reason for knowing a lot of them is to be able to convey complex ideas, to help one express oneself more clearly in cases where simple words will not do. Having a large vocabulary can help one to clarify something which is unable to be clarified without knowledge of a more definitive word.

The article said "know" not "use on a daily basis". I agree most high school graduates should know those words. It is a gauge not only of the language but of what the student was taught in many subjects. Academic intelligence is not necessarily the same thing as intelligence.

Language evolves, or becomes more complex, due to cultural evolution. The need for a words which encompass the new technologies, as well as the changing structure of any given society, causes the need for more complex words.

If there is a simple word which describes something as well as the complex word does, it is best to use it. That is what an intelligent person knows.

I tend to agree with Rich but the other reason for an extensive vocabulary is to be able to understand/convey <en>precise ideas.

What you say is not just about the words you use but about the shades of meaning in the word and the way it's delivered. It doesn't hurt to try to avoid precise language with those who can't appreciate it but just by knowing it, your world and the ways you have to understand it is bigger.

Yes you could say it is a potentially successful occasion instead of auspicious... but then you lose some of the meaning and a lot of the tone. Lacking the exact word to describe a situation is very annoying and usually due to bad memory or insufficient vocabulary.

Also these words have been around a long time. If you read any classic literature, history or basic science textbooks, you will probably encounter most of them. You shouldn't have to be a science major to know how to use the words oxidize or hemoglobin. You shouldn't have to be a Lit major to understand hubris or irony. These are things you are supposed to be taught in school on the way to "real" skills like problem solving and how to read, whether you ever use that vocab or not.

A lot of those words are connected to whole ideas and semesters' worth of learning (example: oxidize).

I think that list says, "If you can totally and completely understand the deeper meaning of these words, then you probably passed the important classes in high school."

That's exactly what it says. The list is not about knowing the words, it's about knowing the words because you know what is behind them.

Much as I hate being wrong (damn it!), these people raise very good points.

I'm usually more impressed with a person who can convey a point without forcing his audience to dig out a dictionary

Tell me about it... I'm reading a book right now and it's pissing me off that I need to look up words like 'exegesis" simply because they needed more flavor in their sentence.

Out of that list I know 82 out of 100 so I'd say that's a good start... but.

Out of 100 of those words, I'd say I actually USE around 47 of them on a regular basis.

I don't really think there SHOULD be a list of "words" people should have to know.

First off, American High School seniors on average don't know how their government works, basic geography, basic math, and lack many simple skills like manners and functional communication skills. Why should I worry about a High School kid who doesn't know that abrogate means to repeal something (like a law). I'm more concerned that they can't give me change for my purchase without the aid of a computer.

Language, words and communication are wonderful but when our modern government run schools don't even prepare you for life employment with McDonalds, why do we need a list of words?

They absolutely do prepare you for employment at McDonald's.

Sorry, when I can reduce a cashier to tears over change from a $5 bill... I'd have to say my confidence wanes a bit.

^ Same.

I found myself getting chewed out by a manager at Taco Bell when I said the word bitch to some people behind me, which was audible through the order microphone. Halfway through her tirade, I looked up at her and went "Ma'am, I make more an hour than you do in a shift. You're a manager at Taco Bell, I'm a computer programmer. You're not even Mexican...Give me my food, here's your money, shut your mouth".

She refused service, I called the corporate office and got free food from that particular restaraunt.

Did I feel bad? No. Mainly because she needs to learn when something is and isn't her business, even if she's the manager. Still, I didn't want to have to go down that road with her..

"Ma'am, I make more an hour than you do in a shift. You're a manager at Taco Bell, I'm a computer programmer. You're not even Mexican...Give me my food, here's your money, shut your mouth"

While I agree that she had no place chewing you out for something that was said between patrons, I don't quite agree with the response.

One can make a point without a salary comparison or racial commentary. She's being the ass and your not making a good arguement if you have to stoop to her level.

When I meant reducing a cashier to tears I mean they literally had NO CLUE as to what to return me in change because the computer wasn't working. This is a $4 meal folks and she lacked the math skills to make less than a DOLLAR in change.

I was being sarcastic. I'm not really sure how what I write comes across here at times.

That having been said I can't tell you the last time I ate at a McDonald's or any fast food place.

Maybe a year ago, maybe longer.

So it's 100 words out of the entire English language? I mean, it's pretty much a random sampling. How about a list where they list 1000 words and say "You should know about [percentage] of this list."

Then again, aren't the words American high school graduates "should" know just in an SAT study book?

My first un-posted post was quite succinct and quite nasty so I've self-moderated and I'm going for a severely fluffier version...

You're likely the last person I expected to see posting something like this, Dook. The amount of times I've cleared up after you've dropped some gargantuan behemoth of a word into a post, not realising you used it incorrectly... Edit: *sigh* anyway...

I don't see any harm in people knowing and understanding (the important part) these words. If people really did concentrate on understanding each and every word from that list, I'm sure there would be a few ascending IQs.

Most of them describe a process including physical biology, language constructs or just socio-political processes. By sitting down and learning what that word really means, you're hopefully going to get the subdermal information required to use it in context or through imagery in a coherent sense.

Just "knowing" them and dropping them around like a fool doesn't impress people -- especially if they know you haven't got a clue what it means.

Ma'am, I make more an hour than you do in a shift. You're a manager at Taco Bell, I'm a computer programmer. You're not even Mexican...Give me my food, here's your money, shut your mouth

How do you expect anyone to treat you with an ounce of respect when you go around talking to people like that. It wasn't necessary.

How do you expect anyone to treat you with an ounce of respect when you go around talking to people like that. It wasn't necessary.

My point exactly... when I made the cashier cry I did my best to a)stop her sob fest as nicely as possible and b)informed her what the change should have been and moved on.

Conflict boils out of control when BOTH sides are being unreasonable.

The reason why I say I think it effects us is due to my own experience with the issue. For example:

Y shud we love sumone who do not hv even a bit feelin fer us?? It took 1 sec to fall in love but a lyfe tyme to ferget dem..How i wish i don't noe hw to love a boy (nt including fam members)..Gosh!! I hate myself fer loving hyme

I automatically translate that to:

Why should we love someone who does not have even a bit of feeling for us? It took 1 second to fall in love but a life time to forget them. How I wish I didn't know how to love a boy (not including family members). Gosh, I hate myself for loving him!

I do it automatically as I am reading it. Being bombarded with this all day in different forms, I suck at proof-reading now where I once excelled at it because I auto-correct as I read. That in itself effects my writing ability.

Perhaps I flipped into a parallel world where I am the only one this happens to, but I honestly admit my writing is not as good as it once was because I can get lazy with it, particularly since my writing style (on my blog) is conversational, not professional. When I was working on my thesis I "really" worked at it because I stopped writing like that a long time ago (professional - yes, kind of ironic since I have a Master's in Business Management). It was worth the effort (got an A and it was voted the best in the class) but it was an eye opener for me. I "can" write like I once did (professional) but it's a chore now when it was once enjoyable.

I'm being honest, IM speak is what I use 60% of the time with online interactions. When you don't use a skill, most times you lose it.

The words matter only because it shows how much the person I am communicating with is different from me. Being multilingual, I understand that what might be a "dumb" person in english is actually a phD professor at some foreign university. Yet even if I know this, I still felt that the person is stupid.

Overtime, my conscious was able to override that emotion, but I still feel it.

What I didn't understand back then, is that language is used to communicate. A good conversationalist is someone who can understand the way the language needs to be used for the other to understand.

A good example is when the VP of an American company tried to convey, with very proper English, a message to an R&D manager at a foreign country and failed consistently. While another person who understood the culture used simpler English words and drawings was met with success.

Is the R&D manager dumb? Dude, he's in R&D. Is the VP dumb? He can probably buy a Corvette every day and still have more money than you. Is that other person dumb? She's just an accountant.

A person's vocabulary is based not on intelligence but exposure. Just glancing at that list I only saw a couple that I couldn't immediately use in a sentence, but it doesn't make me smarter than someone who looks at the list and just says "huh." It just means that I have had more exposure than the other person. I'm more likely to judge a person on what they say rather than how they say it.

For example, if you read something by the linguist Benjamin Wolfe you will find that he uses the largest words and most complex sentence structure to say the most inane things. He isn't more intelligent, just more egotistical and ineffective.