Five abuses of language that we (all) wish never to hear again

Using a word incorrectly, diverting it from its meaning.

Unfortunate habit if there is one, the abuses of language are legion in the current language.

Not a day goes by without us being confronted with it.

They make our interlocutor lose all legitimacy and disturb our attention.

Which ones irritate us the most?

Anthology.

• "It is abused"

“Frankly, it is abused all that one has to learn”.

The key expression of high school students now has its place in any conversation between adults.

The Trésor de la langue française indicates that it is by definition correct to use this word when using something excessively.

But usage today wants the phrase to qualify an admission of impotence.

"Two fines in three hours, it's abused!".

Or a cry of amazement.

"It is abused!

Eight euros a sandwich” Thus, would we prefer to hear “Two fines in three hours, what bad luck!”

and “Eight euros a sandwich is way too expensive”.

Read also

• “I live on…”

If “this construction can possibly be justified by its dynamic connotation”, explains the French Academy.

Thus one can say "to move on Saintes, Honfleur...", just as the soldiers "marched on Rome".

The use of the preposition "on" to "designate a city, a region, and, more generally, the place where one goes, where one is."

is to be banned.

In the sense that it translates an idea of ​​position, of superiority, of domination, let us confine ourselves to the use of “à” or “en”.

"I live in Paris" and "You are going to Saint-Jean-de-Luz".

• "Basic"

"Basically, I come from Bordeaux", "Basically, we learned to play the guitar".

What to say?

The adjectival phrase "basic", meaning "fundamental, essential", has its place in sentences like "Acquiring basic vocabulary is necessary", tell us the academicians.

Similarly, it is customary to use "at the base" to designate what a thing rests on, or what serves as a starting point.

Under no circumstances, therefore, should these expressions be used to replace "in the first place", "at the beginning", or "first".

We prefer to say "In the first place, I come from Bordeaux" and "We first learned to play the guitar".

• "Therefore"

How much longer will we hear this adverbial phrase?

recalls that while expressing the idea of ​​a brutal movement which precedes a shock, “du coup” introduces a notion of immediacy.

It is originally a synonym for “immediately”.

Also, is correct the sentence of Céline, who in

writes: “I risked an advice of immediate transport in a hospital so that one operates it quickly.

Ah!

woe to me!

So, I gave him his most beautiful reply.

On the other hand, using “as a result” to formulate the consequence of an event instead of “as a result”, “therefore”, or “consequently” is to be avoided.

Stop saying “Juliette was disappointed.

So she left” but “Juliette was disappointed.

So she left."

• “Let's go on…”

After having polluted all the conversations in the office, here is the formula, younger than the no less irritating "I'll come back to you", invites itself into everyday language.

A waiter who agrees "Come on, we're leaving on a blanquette for Madame!".

A saleswoman who asks “So, are we going for the green sweater?”.

Who leaves?

Or so?

You will agree, this expression does not make sense.

It suggests the idea of ​​a physical movement that has no place to be.

The only thing we can start with is the wheel caps.

In the past, the formula referred to the hubcaps of the wheels on which the cars rested in a fast race.

Better to say "So you have chosen a blanquette, Madam", and "Is it the green sweater that you choose?".