I use too big of words. Eloquency

[violinist1129]

It seems that you are confusing eloquence with verbosity. Eloquence is finding the best possible combination of words to express meaning (e.g. masters of the Haiku). Verbosity involves using large words or too many words to express meaning. Your habit appears to be using long strings of mid-level words in confusing syntax. Since you aren't regularly using truly difficult words (judging by your post) in a natural way, you don't appear intelligent, instead coming off as an asshat to your coworkers. Incidentally, using larger words in unnatural ways one step of the vocabulary building process according to Johnson O'Connor's theories enumerated in his English Vocabulary Builder. It may very well be that you will "grow into" your larger vocabulary, but as it is, I would suggest not attempting to sound overly articulate.

 

[maxmanrules]

It has become a matter of almost annoyance to some of my co-workers, my using larger words or an extended vocabulary. My conundrum is whether the fault would be my [bad?] habit of making use of my ability to convey what I think more accurately than the average 800 different words people use in a day, or theirs in not being as well read. (Try to grasp the concept underlying that bais-heavy question, as opposed to simply answering the question itself.)

It's a dilemma that has been rather frustrating to think about, since while fundamentally it would be true to say that how I conduct my speech is more verbose than the average person, people I converse with do not like being regarded as such, and become quite indignant at being relegated to the term 'average'.
I thought I'd pose the question to others who's opinions might provide some insight.

I do the same when talking, though less so online. I just ignore any complaints. I'm not going to dumb down what I say for someone since it loses its specific meaning a lot of the time. I also tend to instantly lose interest if someone I'm talking with starts using the "trendy" pronunciations for everyday words, e.g buz (bus), scoo (school), axe (ask) etc.

Do you by any chance live in New Zealand (Noo Zilland to the locals)?

But yes, people do generally get annoyed if you use bigger words than they know/use/understand. As a general rule people generally enjoy feeling superior and cannot face their own incompetence. Also, smiling is a guaranteed way to irritate most people, especially when they're angry.

 

[cookyy2k]

Has anyone else noticed that this has been a OP posts topic guaranteed to draw flack then abandon thread style thread? No attempts to answer criticism or explain himself better when asked.

The OP's post seems way too uncomfortable with the use of language, grammar and sentence structure in particular. Which seems very strangely ironic given the thread's topic.

 

[the spud]

I feel your pain. Most people feel that I am too patronizing (that means I treat them as if they're stupid).

 

[EvilPicnic]

As a side issue - I'm pretty sure 'eloquency' isn't a word.

You probably mean eloquence, which is already a noun. It doesn't need a -y to make it one.

And is probably the wrong word in this context anyway, to be eloquent is to be persuasive in an argument. You probably mean erudite. Or verbose.

But on-topic, my view on the subject is that language (especially in the workplace) is all about conveying meaning. If you are using words that others don't understand then your meaning is lost and your words are useless. This may initially be their fault, but, if after identifying a miscommunication you fail to adjust your language, your use of unconventional words stops being about you conveying meaning and becomes more about you being a pompous dick.

 

[cookyy2k]

As a side issue - I'm pretty sure 'eloquency' isn't a word.

You probably mean eloquence, which is already a noun. It doesn't need a -y to make it one.

Yeah it's not a word, but then "I use too big of words" isn't exactly a well structured sentence either.

 

[mireko]

I have seen people go down this path before and it ends in adverbs.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Has anyone else noticed that this has been a OP posts topic guaranteed to draw flack then abandon thread style thread? No attempts to answer criticism or explain himself better when asked.

The OP's post seems way too uncomfortable with the use of language, grammar and sentence structure in particular. Which seems very strangely ironic given the thread's topic.

Like I said, smells like troll bait. Either that, or he was genuinely expecting something like:

"Verily, sir, I concur with your assessment of your brethren's inferior linguistic status, and applaud your steadfast nature in the face of the decay of modern semiotics. You truly are a herald of verbal perfection in an era of widespread idiom-borne cretinism."

I mean, look at his post count. He's been here before, so he's probably posted properly in other circumstances. Plus, his title is custom. I don't know if you need to reach a specific threshold to edit your title, but if you do and he's got one, I doubt he actually types like this all the time.

Heh. Maybe OP's usually really coherent and he just decided to type this while in a drunken stupor. Or something.

 

[Terrible Opinions]

The following was not meant for conversational English, but there's plenty you can still learn from, here:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

 

[Catalyst6]

Your colleagues are probably more bothered by the fact that you come across as massively condescending as opposed to just the fact that you use more syllables than they do.

I'll put my weight behind this.

Here's the thing about language. "Big words" come in two varieties: there are those that are used because they hold a different connotation to other, simpler words, then there are those that people use because they want to feel intelligent. However, the key is efficiency. If you're writing, sure, be as florid as you want. But speech should be kept as efficient as possible without losing meaning.

For the first case, take the classic case of "thin" versus "skinny". Different connotations, same meaning. The same can be said of many ideas that require so-called "big words" in order to be felt correctly.

Then again, the flip side is that "big words" can be used by people trying to overcompensate. Jargon, weasel words, or simply using unnecessary and usually archaic words can make you *sound* smart, but it doesn't mean anything, really.

For an example of this, find me one person that has used the word "Zeitgeist" in a non-mocking way that is *not* a utter ass. It's tricky!

(Also, for the OP, it might help if you stopped thinking of your co-workers as "average" for not creating purple prose while chatting about the coffee. Y'know. To help with the whole "they think you're a jackass" thing)

 

[Valorik]

Well, I will say this, your increased eloquence does not seem to make you clearer, as you seem to think.

 

[Tree709]

I generally have this problem as well, though mainly when talking to kids. i forget they can't understand what I'm saying and I really have to think about what vocabulary I'm using.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

For an example of this, find me one person that has used the word "Zeitgeist" in a non-mocking way that is *not* a utter ass. It's tricky!

Ooooh, fun!

I don't have anybody in mind, but I could think of a few examples. For instance, I could say right here, without really trying to sound like an ass, that the fact that they've remade Syndicate as a shooter actually is a zeitgeist. Publishers taking the easy way out for extra cash-monies and whatnot.

 

[FernandoV]

It has become a matter of almost annoyance to some of my co-workers, my using larger words or an extended vocabulary. My conundrum is whether the fault would be my [bad?] habit of making use of my ability to convey what I think more accurately than the average 800 different words people use in a day, or theirs in not being as well read. (Try to grasp the concept underlying that bais-heavy question, as opposed to simply answering the question itself.)

It's a dilemma that has been rather frustrating to think about, since while fundamentally it would be true to say that how I conduct my speech is more verbose than the average person, people I converse with do not like being regarded as such, and become quite indignant at being relegated to the term 'average'.
I thought I'd pose the question to others who's opinions might provide some insight.

It has become a matter of almost annoyance to some of my co-workers, my using larger words or an extended vocabulary. My conundrum is whether the fault would be my [bad?] habit of making use of my ability to convey what I think more accurately than the average 800 different words people use in a day, or theirs in not being as well read. (Try to grasp the concept underlying that bais-heavy question, as opposed to simply answering the question itself.)

It's a dilemma that has been rather frustrating to think about, since while fundamentally it would be true to say that how I conduct my speech is more verbose than the average person, people I converse with do not like being regarded as such, and become quite indignant at being relegated to the term 'average'.
I thought I'd pose the question to others who's opinions might provide some insight.

Purple prose is a sign of a real fool.

 

[Agayek]

You're problem is that you're not eloquent. What you are is loquacious. Your speech, if it's anything like your typing, is excessively wordy with frivolous use of three dollar words. You come across as vacuous and pretentious (even if you're not). The simple fact is, you abuse language and there is a certain level of arrogance in your speech, and that's what people are disliking.

 

[kurupt87]

You may have a large vocabulary but your grammatical skills leave much to be desired. Also, you get a couple of "sayings" wrong.

Neither is eloquency a word; you would be looking for eloquence, I suspect.

The more I look at this post the more it seems to be a trolling attempt. /shrug

 

[hardlymotivated]

If your original post is anything to go by, I'm going to go ahead and guess that the reason your co-workers find your speech annoying isn't because it's verbose, but because you seem to be trying way too hard.

In your attempts to pepper your language with verbal flourishes, you're butchering the grammar of the sentences. You're coming across as being pompous rather than intelligent. Obfuscating meaning by adding needlessly long-winded words and phrases to your sentences isn't eloquence; it's pretentiousness.

 

[Agayek]

For an example of this, find me one person that has used the word "Zeitgeist" in a non-mocking way that is *not* a utter ass. It's tricky!

I actually use the word "Zeitgeist" semi-quasi-regularly. Generally it's confined to when I'm discussing/debating the merits of certain sociopolitical trends with people, but I definitely use it, and I'd like to think I'm not a complete ass.

...

Only most of one.

 

[AugustFall]

If you talk like you type than I sympathize with your co-workers. You sound like you're trying so hard it makes reading your post a chore.

Wanna sound smart? Be concise. You are not speaking or writing intelligently if explaining what you mean takes a paragraph rather than a sentence.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

Your grammar needs work OP.
"I use too big of words" makes zero sense.

Is it naive of me to hope that that might have been a joke?

OT: An extensive vocabulary is indicative of neither eloquence nor intelligence. The only thing it shows it that you have a vague idea as to the meanings of various "big words" and the willingness to use them. Frequently a deliberate use of terms not often used in conversation will make one appear to be a pretentious arse.

However, that's never stopped me in the past, and is unlikely to do so in the future. My typing is generally a great deal more colloquial than my speech for some reason. That might be due to the ability to use apostrophes phonetically.