Got would?

[BTExpress]

Ultimately, it seems, we would be talking about Pleonasm

Which is the use of more words or parts of words than are necessary or sufficient for clear expression. Pleonasm may also be used for emphasis or because a certain phrase has become established in a certain form (from the wiki).

In other words (many of them) . . .

"Ultimately, he would go on to hit a walk-off grand slam home run in the bottom of the inning to win the game"

 

[ADanielPandR]

"Losing effort" soured on me quickly. I've heard that on occasion from regional sports anchors, but it's mostly another SID phrase meant to put a positive spin on everything. From my experience, the people who use that term and/or teach their subordinates to are the same people who warn impartial credentialed reporters not to make their teams "look bad."

 

[ondeadline]

If we're naming redundancies (words you can nearly always omit):

-- New. Smith named as new coach = Smith named as coach. Of course she's a new coach. Everyone understands that teams don't hire the old coach.

-- Local. A local hospital = a hospital. If they were flown to Paris for surgery, we'd say that.

-- -based. A Nashville-based freelancer = a Nashville freelancer. Everyone understands that people travel for work. They're not the Chicago-based Cubs.

The other irritating part of hospital references is when there are many hospitals in the area yet the reporter says they taken to THE hospital.

 

[MeanGreenATO]

Lots of folks need to read a copy of "The Elements of Style" and tighten copy.

 

[Situation]

Just call him "CEH." Maybe it will catch on.

Or LSU running back or star RB

 

[CD Boogie]

Reminds me of an old writing teacher who said "that" can be eliminated from almost any sentence, usually by rewriting it with stronger adjectives.

 

[Liut]

"Losing effort" soured on me quickly. I've heard that on occasion from regional sports anchors, but it's mostly another SID phrase meant to put a positive spin on everything. From my experience, the people who use that term and/or teach their subordinates to are the same people who warn impartial credentialed reporters not to make their teams "look bad."

"Fall" definitely falls into your category. Would not be surprised if "fall" originated with an SID.

 

[ADanielPandR]

"Fall" definitely falls into your category. Would not be surprised if "fall" originated with an SID.

Definitely. "Lose" and "loss" are four-letter words for some people, which is why they never fail to substitute "fall" for the former or turn the latter into an adjective while adding an extra word to remind everyone "the team tried their best, so they're basically still winners." Meanwhile, behind closed doors, there's a 50-50 chance the coach filled the locker room with actual four-letter words, and even hyperpartisan spectators probably would not fault him/her.

 

[Old Time Hockey]

"Lose" and "loss" are four-letter words for some people, which is why they never fail to substitute "fall" for the former or turn the latter into an adjective while adding an extra word to remind everyone "the team tried their best, so they're basically still winners." Meanwhile, behind closed doors, there's a 50-50 chance the coach filled the locker room with actual four-letter words, and even hyperpartisan spectators probably would not fault him/her.

Once received a call from an angry parent wanted to know why we were calling her darling a loser. "Um, ma'am? The other guy won. He lost. It's a result, not a character assessment."

Mom was not mollified. I still shake my head at that one.

 

[BTExpress]

Definitely. "Lose" and "loss" are four-letter words for some people.

Not so fast.

"fall" is one full headline count less than "lose." That can be the difference in being able to add the word "to" on the same line of a one-column headline, giving the full use of the next line for something like the opponent's nickname.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

Basically.
A **** word that means nothing.
And I see it all - the - time.

 

[Junkie]

Basically.
A **** word that means nothing.
And I see it all - the - time.

You can apply that to 95 percent of adverbs. Weak adjectives, weak verbs, etc.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

Aye. Adverbs are first to go if you're trying to save a line. Once had an instructor who would circle every one.
Like Derek Jacobi said about playing Shakespeare - you gotta belt out the verbs.
Then you don't need the ****ty adverbs.

 

[justgladtobehere]

Definitely. "Lose" and "loss" are four-letter words for some people, which is why they never fail to substitute "fall" for the former or turn the latter into an adjective while adding an extra word to remind everyone "the team tried their best, so they're basically still winners." Meanwhile, behind closed doors, there's a 50-50 chance the coach filled the locker room with actual four-letter words, and even hyperpartisan spectators probably would not fault him/her.

'Fall' and 'lose' are not the same. There is some subjective, greater emphasis with 'fall.' 'Alabama falls to Auburn' is not the same as 'Alabama loses to Auburn.' The desire for tight copy shouldn't eclipse good writing.

If the objection to the 'fall' is it is a cliche, fine. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.

 

[Liut]

To each his/her own ... I hate it and don't use it. Guess I'm a ****ty writer. Based on your premise, there sure are a lot of significant losses anymore. I see/hear about them every single day.

Your example prompted an image in my head of the entire Alabama team laid out all over the field.

 

[SixToe]

Using fall for lose joins my peeve of "pass away" for died.

Joe died. He didn't pass away.

It's nothing but a mollycoddling of emotions and lazy writing.

 

[SFIND]

Using fall for lose joins my peeve of "pass away" for died.

Joe died. He didn't pass away.

It's nothing but a mollycoddling of emotions and lazy writing.

Couldn't agree more, but I'll take "passed away" any day over "went to be home with the Lord."

 

[SixToe]

If someone's family submitting the obit wants to include anything along the lines of "slipped these bounds to be home with the Lord," I'm fine with that. That's their choice. If you're paying for the obit, as many newspapers require today, unless there's some kind of policy about mentioning God, the Lord, Sun Ra, Jehovah, DoggyCatGod or any other deity then I don't care.

Employees using passed away for died makes my head hurt, though.

 

[justgladtobehere]

To each his/her own ... I hate it and don't use it. Guess I'm a ****ty writer. Based on your premise, there sure are a lot of significant losses anymore. I see/hear about them every single day.

Your example prompted an image in my head of the entire Alabama team laid out all over the field.

I didn't mean to suggest an absolute. More that the a word can be used to differentiate things. Maybe it is overused and has become trite, but that doesn't mean the word or phrase can't have significance.

I'm pushing back against a suggestion that because a word or phrase is overused and poorly applied generally, it should be avoided. There are inherently poorly chosen words, but also ones that are just overused.

 

[CD Boogie]

Couldn't agree more, but I'll take "passed away" any day over "went to be home with the Lord."

I like it when teams succumb to their opponent.