Junk
English Home
Introduction
Excerpts
About Ken Smith
Other
Books
New
Junk
Reviews
Contact Ken
Send
us your best Junk!
If you've spotted a choice scrap of Junk English, submit
it here and Ken may add it to the web site! Read Ken's book first, of course.
Read what others
have sent.
 Order your copy online today! Only $10.36... |
 Buy the book! |
Beyond our Ken
Why did you write Junk
English?
Ken: I wrote Junk English because I was mad, which is probably not a healthy reason to write a book. Still, it's better than yelling at my television or pounding my fist on the dashboard of my car, which I do whenever a salesperson or spokesperson on the TV or radio plays fast and loose with the language.
 Ken attempts to explain something to young people in Belgium, 2001. |
I also wrote Junk English because I felt it was necessary. There are many books about grammar and usage, but most Americans don't read them. The ordinary person learns American English usage and style either from their friends and acquaintances -- who don't know any more than they do -- or through politicians, commercials, PR spokespersons. So we have several generations now of people who want to sound intelligent -- and the abundance of pretentious lingo in our language is evidence of that -- but their role models are either uninformed or manipulative.
I decided that what was needed was a little book that would call attention to the most common examples of English abuse and misuse. I wanted it to be fun, non-threatening, inexpensive, easy-to-understand, and I wanted to write it for the ordinary speaker and writer of the language.
How did you conduct your research?
Ken: For six months I sat back and let Junk English wash over me. I watched infomercials, I read the advertising inserts in my phone bill, and I also read a variety of popular magazines and newspapers. As the days passed into weeks and months, patterns became evident. Certain words were overused and misused all the time -- factor, focus, formulate, issue, impact, serious -- and then there was other corruption that naturally aggregated into categories: Useless Cabooses, Smears, Jargon Gridlock. I gave them catchy names in the hope that it would help people to remember them.
Writing is one thing, but do you think most people think quickly enough
to speak good English in real time? You give us a lot of credit.
On assignment for
Dumpster World, 1987.
Ken: I make the point several times in the book that spoken English cannot be held to the same standards as written English. Speech is immediate, and you can't expect people to form sentences perfectly on the fly. But sloppy, lazy errors can be avoided, and I hope that anyone who reads Junk English will pause in the split second before they utter "impact" or "issue," and change them to "affect" or "problem" if that is what they actually mean to say.
What public figures practice good English? What public figures don't?
Ken: Junk English is pervasive. We all are guilty of it, and I am as bad as anyone else. Writing this book was humbling, and very difficult, because it made me realize just how bad my writing is. But it also gave me hope. If I could improve then anybody can.
In your last book, Mental Hygiene, you seemed to decry a push toward conformity. How is the fight against Junk English different from "Verbal Hygiene"? Shouldn't people just be free to express themselves, and let the chips fall where they may?
Ken: Junk English is conformity. We write "mandate" and "documentation" because everybody else does, not because they are the best words to express what we want to say. We write "function" or "positive" not because they are fresh and innovative but because they are the first words that pop into our heads, and they do so because we hear and read them used, over and over, by others whose vocabulary is as narrow as our own.
Beyond that, Junk English is about everyday language -- a tool of communication -- not poetry or language as art. Communication involves at least two people, a sender and a receiver. The receiver should be foremost in our minds.
The best way to communicate our free, original thoughts and feelings and beliefs to other people is with clear, precise, standard language. That may sound like a paradox, but it really isn't. A keyboard that types random letters when we depress the keys would be challenging and creative, but it would be a bad tool of communication.
Do you think Junk English is inherently evil? What will happen if we don't fight it?
Ken: Junk English, with its tendency toward imprecision and empty expression, is gradually reducing our ability to evaluate information, form intelligent opinions, recognize errors, make reasoned arguments -- in short, to think. That is dangerous. American English, however, will survive and people will continue to communicate with it whether I like it or not.
[Interview by Susie Kirby, Nov. 10, 2001]