I love the English language. I think there is something interesting about every word. There is an intangible beauty in a properly formed sentence with well-used words. This is why I hate the description of hurricanes as "churning", which seems to be used by every news anchor and meteorologist on television.
Hurricanes don't churn! Butter is churned! Hurricanes can also roil, spin, veer, lurk, or prowl. Churn was never a good word anyway, in my opinion, but the arbitrary and indiscriminate use of it by ignorant news people has destroyed any hope of a meaningful use of the word.
Since it is already dead and useless, it should be taken to the deep woods and thrown into a fast moving river, never to be remembered.
Posted by Theaca (Member # 8325) on :
It is when it's the only word used to describe the situation. News anchors clearly have a very limited vocabulary.
Posted by Theaca (Member # 8325) on :
I don't know, it seems better than a lot of the alternatives. I'll have to listen more closely tonight.
"Hurricanes can also roil, spin, veer, lurk, or prowl"
I don't know what you mean by that, the only one of those that I like is spin, I'm not sure if that is better or worse than churn. What words would you use to describe the situation?
Posted by Joldo (Member # 6991) on :
Same with chauvinism.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
quote:What words would you use to describe the situation?
"Hurricane Rita is lurking offshore, ready to strike the Texas coast." "Rita is menacing the gulf coast with powerful winds, rain and storm surge." "The storm is prowling, ready to strike within hours."
I can think of several ways to describe it. "Churn" is being used far too much be effective as a description. Reporters don't have to be creative when they describe a hurricane, but if they insist, then they should think about a few more ways say it.
It has become a pet peeve of mine now.
Posted by Nell Gwyn (Member # 8291) on :
Weather people need to come up with another word for "juicy" too - they use that to describe the humidity constantly on Long Island. The first time I heard it, I thought, "EW, gross!" But then after I realized it was the only word they use, it wasn't nearly as effective.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
You realize that "lurk," "menace," and "prowl" are all things that by definition a hurricane cannot actually do, right? Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
*sigh* Newspeak is around the corner...
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
*runs away*
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
quote:You realize that "lurk," "menace," and "prowl" are all things that by definition a hurricane cannot actually do, right?
What's wrong with a little literary exaggeration? These are a few of many fine alternative descriptive words.
Maybe newscasters really are as stupid as I think they are.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: These are a few of many fine alternative descriptive words.
Except they're not. Hurricanes don't lurk, menace, OR prowl. By anthropomorphizing it, you actually cease to accurately describe its behavior.
Posted by Theaca (Member # 8325) on :
That's exactly why I think churn is a better choice than the others you listed.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I agree with Reader that more descriptive words might be used, although I would describe the hurricane more like a big, ponderous, lumbering beast than a sneaky panther.
However, a lot depends on the rhetorical situation of the announcer. Lots of people are watching the news, worried about what the hurricane is going to do. They are already on the edge of panic if the hurricane is headed their way. Saying it's going to pounce on them like some predator won't do anything to calm nerves. Even saying that it's lumbering toward the coast gives a sense of some huge unavoidable doom. That's why I think announcers choose descriptions that simply describe what the hurricane is presently doing. It's "churning" in the waters off the coast, and it's "headed" for some certain region. That doesn't sound nearly as threatening.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
I think churn accurately describes it and gives a good mental image of the activity inside the hurricanes.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Yea, churn sounds much more accurate than lurk, menace, or prowl but churning storm approaching landfall doesn't sell newspapers and a storm that is lurking just off the coast ready to strike and inflict total devastation does.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I think it would be hard for a hurricane to lurk. What does it do, hide in the shadows?
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Hurricanes cannot lurk. That implies it's somehow being stealthy. Storms that cover the entire Gulf of Mexico on satellite photos cannot be stealthy. The same goes for prowl.
As for striking, that implies something quick, like a cobra. A storm that moves 6 to 10 mph and that you have several days notice of doesn't strike. It sort of comes through like a slow steamroller.
Posted by ludosti (Member # 1772) on :
But the hurricane isn't churning. If we want to use churn I guess we should say "the winds are churning the hurricane" or "God is churning the hurricane", unless, of course, the hurricane is actually churning butter.
Reader - Are you, likewise, bothered by the use of "grow" in talking about inanimate objects or abstract concept (ie. "grow your business/portfolio")? That one always rankles me.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)