An article by the CBC discusses the care that journalists need to take when deciding what terminology to use because words change their meaning over time, are imprecise in their usage, or carry with them certain connotations. Here are the examples they present:

Mayhem: This word came to us from Old French and originally meant to "wound" or "maim". It eventually became a legal term, referring to the specific crime of "rendering someone defenceless by inflicting severe injury." The word appears to be in slow transition. Although it has been used as a synonym for ruckus from time to time over the past 100 years, this broadened meaning appears to remain on the periphery of accepted usage. Most major dictionaries still refer to bodily harm or, at the very least, chaotic violence and wilful damage in their definitions.

Shambles: A few decades ago, writers were warned that shambles always implied bloodshed, and that even the sharpest knife could not sever the word’s connection to slaughterhouses. Nowadays, however, we have all sorts of places and things in "shambles" – even accounting records as people try to make ends meet.

Decimate:The original Latin word referred to "reducing by one-tenth," based on the ancient custom of killing one out of every 10 people to punish an entire group.

Meticulous In Shakespeare’s days, the adjective meant fearful. A few centuries later, it became an insult to describe anyone who appeared overly fussy. Now it’s often considered high praise, a way to compliment someone who’s very careful.

Juggernaut is a perfectly acceptable term for "an overwhelming force." But the word came to English from Hindu mythology, based on Sanskrit "Jagannatha" (Lord of the World), and it may not be the best way to describe a military offensive in a Muslim country.

Near miss If two objects nearly miss one another, they actually hit. Based on this argument, investigators looking into a "near miss" over Pearson International Airport might well be picking through wreckage, while a probe into a "near collision" would be a far less unhappy affair.

Center around Since the construction first appeared in the middle of the 19th century, many editors have pointed out that objects cannot be centred around anything. Centers are points, and while they may be "on" things they can’t actually orbit them, according to this logic.

Ilka

Posted by: Ilka Posted on: Today at 3:48pm

Near miss If two objects nearly miss one another, they actually hit. Based on this argument, investigators looking into a "near miss" over Pearson International Airport might well be picking through wreckage, while a probe into a "near collision" would be a far less unhappy affair.

I always thought of near miss as opposed to far miss indicating a degree of escaping contact.

The rest of these I find very interesing in their demonstration of semantic drift.

[quote author=Ilka link=board=omni;num=1050954537;start=0#0 date=04/21/03 at 15:48:57]Center around Since the construction first appeared in the middle of the 19th century, many editors have pointed out that objects cannot be centred around anything. Centers are points, and while they may be "on" things they can’t actually orbit them, according to this logic.

While I found the rest of the words and their commentary very interesting, this last item left me puzzled.  Just because a center is a ‘point’ doesn’t mean it can’t be within something.

Certainly the Sun is the ‘center’ of the Solar System (with some days better than others); alternatively, we could quite logically state that the Solar System is centered around the Sun!

I don’t have a problem with this.  Am I missing something?

-Tim

I think the point is in the precision. An object can be centered on a point in a region, it can’t be centered on the region.

I feel comfortable with the statement that the solar system is centered around the sun because the sun is the point that is the center of the solar system… the solar system revolves around the sun might be a better way to say it though.  "Centered around" implies not that the center is around, but that something else is around something that is it’s center.  Well, at least it implies that in this instance.  

~Shannon

I don’t have a problem with "near miss". The bullet missed me, but came near. Thus, a near miss. I’d have more of a problem with "nearly missed", as in "the bullet nearly missed me".

Interesting examples, Ilka, of semantic shifts. I think the decimate thing is popular understanding now. The last time I recall it’s being used in the "civilized" world was by the French Army during the First World War to punish regiments that mutinied. One in ten.

- PW

It looks like my literal interpretation is not the source of the problem.  I did a search on the phrase "centered around" and came up with several examples that I agree are questionable uses:

The research in my laboratory is centered around understanding the development & evolution of the vertebrate skeleton.

Here at the primary school our philosophy in physical education is centered around each student developing a greater appreciation for physical activity through exploratory and guided discovery experiences as well as experiences that are directly taught, which are designed around movement development, fitness development and working cooperatively with others.

It’s even sadder that this last example was some sort of ‘philosophy statement’ for a New Hampshire school system.

-Tim

An interesting collection.

Centred around please excuse my British spelling! is a common construction but I wonder if it is a little tautologous? If things are grouped around something then they are centred on that something.

Juggernaut in the Uk means a large lorry, which harks back to its Hindu origins.

Near miss always gives our safety manager appoplexy. She tries to avoid the expression but usually bows to the inevitable.

Do you happen to know if BBC or CNN have a special person who takes care of the properness in language, expression, accent?

Nymann, this is what the article says about the system they use to monitor language usage and avoid errors.

We try to be thorough, but we’re fallible. Every so often mistakes on the air or the Internet prompt senior CBC journalists to send memos about English usage to editorial staff. These messages are posted on an internal computer system to remind reporters, producers, editors, and others about common pitfalls. Some of the notes are added to an electronic "Language Directory," which includes the proper pronunciation of thousands of names and cities.

To get a glimpse behind the scenes, here is a short list of tips from several people, including Bruce Woolley (a veteran producer with National Radio News and Newsworld), Russ Germain (co-host of The World at Six and the Broadcast Language Advisor for Radio News), and Neil Everton (a former BBC journalist who is now an instructor with the CBC’s Training Department).

...

"Raise almost any point of usage with two journalists and you will almost certainly get two confident but entirely contradictory answers," writes Bill Bryson… Although an exaggeration, there is a measure of truth in his observation. It’s one of the reasons many media outlets have their own manuals – something The Globe and Mail refers to as a "Style Book" and the Canadian Press calls a "Stylebook."

The CBC’s style has evolved over the years, influenced by the times as well as the people who work in its newsrooms across the country. Our listeners, viewers, and now online readers also have direct input.

Hope this answers your question. I don’t know if one single person is responsible.

Ilka

[quote author=Ilka link=board=omni;num=1050954537;start=0#0 date=04/21/03 at 15:48:57]An article by the CBC discusses the care that journalists need to take when deciding what terminology to use because words change their meaning over time, are imprecise in their usage, or carry with them certain connotations [my emphasis, MHD]. ...

Our very own Dr Language has provided us with an exposition on this matter which I deem will repay careful reflection. It is to be found close by at Warspeak: Linguistic Collateral Damage ....

Henri

I’ve always thought of "near miss" as being short for, "[it] nearly didn’t miss me."

Patricia