Words we never need

"very"

 

I seem to recall within the past year someone on SJ making a technical argument over the use of murder, as opposed to manslaughter, based on the legal meanings of such terms. I thought that was what the poster meant by listing murder in this thread.

 

They never slowly take somebody to a faraway hospital.

 

By bicycle.

 

Maybe by cart?

 

Reminds me of my first sportswriting gig 20 years ago, when some lady called and reamed me out because I wrote, "... gunned down at the plate."

 

How is this different than any other need for "allegedly"?

 

In order, as in the "in order to" construction.

I just cut that mostly every time I see it.

 

I normally don't like editing quotes, but if a reporter quotes someone as saying "gonna" for "going to" or "gotta" for "got to," I'll generally change it unless it's a lengthy centerpiece-type profile and the precise quotes add to the tone of the story. No reason to leave those in if it's a garden-variety game story or advance. This was another sensible Craig Stanke ruling from years ago.

A reporter at my former shop (which also frowned upon using "gonna" and "gotta" in the company stylebook) used these "words" constantly, and I got some pushback from one of his editors about changing it -- "It's how these guys talk." Maybe so, but that doesn't mean it's good English.

 

I'm with MileHigh on "that." Most of the time it's an extra word that's not needed.

I'm also tired of people using it (instead of "who") to describe people: "MileHigh is a moderator that likes the Broncos." Grrrr ...

 

The first lesson I learned in journalism at college was never use "gonna."

There are tons of variations, especially in today's vernacular: "Know what I'm sayin'?" ... "I mean ... " to start out a quote ... "..., man."