Don't they know English?

Madman Starryteller

Madman Starryteller

Life is Sacred
Active Member
Member
New Member
In this thread we lament the downfall of communication by observing and highlighting misused English by established sources (such as movies, news, etc).

I will begin. I saw the IMDB page of Star Trek: Section 31, where they label the woman Philippa Georgiou as an "emperor" instead of empress. I'm not a perfect English user myself by any means, but even I knew that one!

What heresy have you seen lately?
 
I don't have any from media sources off the top of my head, but would you mind if we just gave examples of the poor use of the language?
 
Lose and loose drives me batty. I don't care about the yours and theres anymore because it's been decades since people cared.

Enjoy some Little Carmine malapropisms here:

 
Madman Starryteller said:
In this thread we lament the downfall of communication by observing and highlighting misused English by established sources (such as movies, news, etc).

I will begin. I saw the IMDB page of Star Trek: Section 31, where they label the woman Philippa Georgiou as an "emperor" instead of empress. I'm not a perfect English user myself by any means, but even I knew that one!

What heresy have you seen lately?
Click to expand...
But is it being misused? If we were to be really picky, empress isn't merely a female ruler of an empire. They're the consort of a male emperor, in the same way as 'queen' is descended from the Anglo-Saxon 'cweyn' or 'cwen'. Early modern female rulers are often referred to in the primary sources as 'female kings' when they ruled in their own right. The only empress who has ruled an empire in her own right is Queen Victoria, and she was a constitutional monarch, not an absolute ruler. In Star Trek canon (that slippery, retconnable beast) the ruler of the Terran Empire is always the Emperor - presumably for the above reasons. The etymology may be questionable but I would submit that it isn't wrong.
 
Dante Dases said:
But is it being misused? If we were to be really picky, empress isn't merely a female ruler of an empire. They're the consort of a male emperor, in the same way as 'queen' is descended from the Anglo-Saxon 'cweyn' or 'cwen'. Early modern female rulers are often referred to in the primary sources as 'female kings' when they ruled in their own right. The only empress who has ruled an empire in her own right is Queen Victoria, and she was a constitutional monarch, not an absolute ruler. In Star Trek canon (that slippery, retconnable beast) the ruler of the Terran Empire is always the Emperor - presumably for the above reasons. The etymology may be questionable but I would submit that it isn't wrong.
Click to expand...
They can't get away with it! In my book it is misused.
 
Madman Starryteller said:
They can't get away with it! In my book it is misused.
Click to expand...
Why is it wrong then? The etymology I have explained suggests that it is acceptable. Simply saying 'emperor is man, empress woman' is inaccurate. Language - particularly gendered language when it comes to power, historical or otherwise - is a tricky entity. There are times when its use is clearly wrong or inaccurate - their, there, they're, you're, your, have, of are all common examples - but the selection of a word is far more difficult to place. Are all the letters of Elizabeth I's contemporaries, describing her as 'king' wrong in their use of language? Absolutely not. England had previously only had a single queen regnant, and she was overshadowed by her husband. Would describing Elizabeth II as 'king' be wrong? Almost certainly yes, as language and understanding has changed over time.

If a creator wished to create a female emperor, then they're quite at liberty to do so without needing to refer to them as an empress owing to constraints within the language. John Scalzi created the office of 'emperox', a gender-neutral term which may be more friendly, but doesn't fit with existing Star Trek canon.
 
@Dante Dases
Her contemporaries referred to her as such because perhaps that was the language available to them. You are right it doesn't make them wrong. But language changes, and today we do know better. And if you are writing for a modern audience, there are expectations to write so they understand. This choice to label her emperor may cause unnecessary confusion.
 
Madman Starryteller said:
@Dante Dases
Her contemporaries referred to her as such because perhaps that was the language available to them. You are right it doesn't make them wrong. But language changes, and today we do know better. And if you are writing for a modern audience, there are expectations to write so they understand. This choice to label her emperor may cause unnecessary confusion.
Click to expand...
It's far broader than that. 'Cweyn' was always in conjunction with a husband. When a queen reigned, it was in right of her husband (or, on occasion, her son). Even when a woman was an empress, it was because there was a man somewhere. Empress Matilda held the title not because she herself ruled the Holy Roman Empire, but because she was the wife of Henry V and was, technically, a dowager empress (and that really is for want of a better word, given the context of the time. The Holy Roman Emperor was not a hereditary position, so to refer to her as a dowager is more referring to her widowhood than it is to her formal position).

Going further back, the root of the noun empress is imperatrix - the Latin feminine form of imperator. Emperor. No woman held the office in Rome; it is a linguistic fancy rather than the product of realpolitik in the same way as queen or king. It holds a potential double meaning in its English form: either a woman who holds power over an empire; or a woman who is married to the emperor. It is not an absolute title, unlike emperor itself. Its use within this context clarifies who holds power, and makes complete sense within the context of the show. The Terran Empire values strength and toxic masculinity; it would not allow itself to be ruled by an empress, with power effectively falling a rung down the ladder. The choice of language carries that message within it, precisely because it is gendered language carrying each and every one of these connotations. It's quite subtle use of language to carry a message; rather than being its misuse because the person carrying the title is female, it represents quite clever use of language to make values judgements about the society that character represents. No way, in-universe, does Emperor Georgiou accept that her position is in right of anything. Any kind of uncertainty must be erased. So no imperatrix. Imperator.

Language is not a blunt instrument. Meaning can be broadly and narrowly constructed. In this case, the broader construction builds the character. An understanding of the etymology is useful in building this character and the world she comes from.
 
@Dante Dases
You think it's clever use of language, and I think it causes confusion. We probably won't see eye to eye on this. I still believe it's misuse of language when one of the core principles of language is to try and create comprehension.

If only a certain group gets it, it holds less power in my opinion.
 
Dante Dases said:
'emperor is man, empress woman' is inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Not really. If you wanted to be 100% accurate, you could say Queen Regnant or Empress Regnant, but Queen or Empress is an acceptable shorthand. No one actually distinguishes between Queen and Queen Regnant, whereas to say Emperor of a woman is as incorrect as saying Empress of a man. Margaret Pole was the Countess of Salisbury, not the Earl of Salisbury.
 
Madman Starryteller said:
I will begin. I saw the IMDB page of Star Trek: Section 31, where they label the woman Philippa Georgiou as an "emperor" instead of empress. I'm not a perfect English user myself by any means, but even I knew that one!
Click to expand...
Well, we're weaning ourselves away from the "-ess" suffix, along with the now archaic "-trix." Amelia Earhart was an "aviatrix" in her day, but now that seems strange, and we commonly use "aviator" for a pilot of either gender. The only time I see the word "actress" is in award ceremonies, and Meryl Streep or Helen Mirren are "actors" in most other contexts. "Negress" went out with the last century, and nobody uses it (or "Negro," for that matter) anymore.

So I would concede that a woman might be an "Emperor" if she ruled in her own right instead of a consort. Not a hill I would care to die on.

Like Louanne, I see the misuse of words like "less" vs. "fewer" and was happy to note that Trader Joe's had a register for "six items or fewer" especially since I had only four items to pay for. (Well, one of them was a dozen eggs, and one would expect a really anal checker to say, "That makes fifteen items, buddy. Go to some other line.")

My own pet peeve is when I refer to people having "free reign" instead of "free rein." I guess emperors can have "free reign" in that their reign is untrammeled, but we give horses "free rein" by dropping the reins and letting the horse go where it wants. Since practically nobody rides horses anymore, it's understandable that some writers don't understand the term.

Writers who say "free rain" should be shot on sight. Also editors who let that slip by them.
 
I think Philippa Georgiou would give everyone a withering look and remind us she comes from a different world entirely, so our rules don't apply to her, language or otherwise.

Would it not be against the prime directive to tell her she's wrong about her title?

And JLT, I am one of the writers who says free reign because my brain just makes it make sense. I do fix it, though, when I go back for edits.

I have friends who use the wrong to/too all the time and I work very hard not to give them a bit of the business about it. English is a complicated language. My niece is learning to read, and hearing her process sounds and figure out words reminds me that I have decades of understanding and she has a year of symbols she just found out can make words. She spells her name with pride, and tells me that our names are the same (they're not, but the first two letters are).

I think it's fascinating how language can be universal while confusing the hell out of everyone.

That said, I will always be delighted by questionable quotation marks.

"New" socks
Buy one get one "free"
"Fresh baked" cookies


Just like the ones Grammar used to make.
 
Madman Starryteller said:
I will begin. I saw the IMDB page of Star Trek: Section 31, where they label the woman Philippa Georgiou as an "emperor" instead of empress. I'm not a perfect English user myself by any means, but even I knew that one!
Click to expand...

Yes! YES! YES!!! This drove me crazy during the recent (and very famous) mushroom trial, where the media constantly, repeatedly, and mistakenly referred to Erin Patterson as a "convicted murderer".

Groan. The word is "murderess", not "murderer". Aggggghhhhh.

Deep breath. Sorry. Thanks for listening. 😊
 
One of my duties at my current job is monitoring three email inboxes on top of my own and redirecting emails to where they need to go. :)

One email reply to us made me both laugh and groan:

"Please be advised that this email address is not in used (sic) and monitored, please kindly redirected (sic) your massage (sic) to the email address indicated in our previous email.

Thank you."

Um ... I'm not sure how I can redirect a massage, except maybe stop massaging one person and start massaging another? But then, the first person would probably complain. :)

Also, saying "Please kindly" is a tautology. There is no need to say the same thing over and over.

Lastly, I'm no stickler for absolutely correct grammar, but the whole mess of "not in used" and "please kindly redirected" makes my brain hurt.

The song "Word Crimes" by Weird Al comes to mind ... ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top