Can anyone explain the obsession nowadays with changing long-established, well-understood words for new words which are unclear and misleading? Some of these changes are actually detrimental to the running of a business.
Please be sure to read the article
before joining this moderated forum. No user registration is required to post comments.
|
|
| Posted |
Comment |
Visitor |
| 08-1-2008 | The gripe is perfectly valid and I agree with it. Having been out of the workplace now, as a housewife for many years, I have been overwhelmed at the changes in office and job descriptions, let alone general daily life. Junior clerks are now "administrative assistants" , for example, and t...more | overfiftys |
| 07-9-2007 | Read old books and newpapers and you see " A hotel..." but nowadays it's "An hotel..." Madness. | Pericles |
| 03-9-2007 | Personnel dept = yuk. Human Resources = yuk. What's wrong with just
Staffing office?
Actually the renaming is simply a refelection of the fact that human beings are now simply ciphers, and of no real consequence to the business. | A Mignon |
| 31-8-2007 | I agree the way officious people explain things to us poor mortals confuses that much that in the end we tend to give up anyway.Also peoples job titles change practically from week to week.Mine started off as classroom assistant then went to teaching assistant then teachers assistant and now its lea...more | anon |
| 31-8-2007 | So are you saying, if the change has been made for reasons of Political Correctness that the change is valid, but not if it has been done to confuse?
Isn't political correctness an attempt to curb Freedom of Speech?
Something that results in a change of department name within an organisat...more | Chris |
| 30-8-2007 | trivial! the language we speak now has changed enormously from 200 years ago, our language has been constantly changing for better or worse since the first person formed his/her first syllable. Police force/Police service - noone would care if they did their job. Ditto personnel. | ron |
| 30-8-2007 | You're right, the gripe sound sound and is trivial. | yoyo |
| 30-8-2007 | >Are you happy about our "Police Force" now being described as a "Police Service"?
Well actually, no - not really. Personally I would have thought that calling them "Police Farce" would have been the right thing to do! | Having a poke |
| 30-8-2007 | Totally agree.
I'd just like to suggest that maybe the Police are due another name change as they no longer appear to be a "Force" or offer a "Service". As a marketeer, I'd like to suggest the following:
Lazy Officious Doughnut Eating Kids Playing God.
I used to ...more | Beefmonkey |
| 30-8-2007 | Would that be 'prehaps' or 'perhaps' Angrydad? ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't resist! | Freddie |
| 30-8-2007 | Before anyone corrects me it is a typo on my previous entry. I meant to type the word "thing" obviously, not "ting".
That having been said I tend to type so fast that I often change words so prehaps we should all be doing it!!! | Angrydadcalledray |
| 30-8-2007 | I quite agree.
It does nothing but confuse things and companies spend money on this sort of ting which is even more unbelievable. Remember how much BT spent on changing its logo? Same principle.
I can almost understand it if the existing term is likely to cause offense (not mentioning a particular...more | Angrydadcalledray |
<< prev <<
>> next >>
|
