Subject:
|
A Small Rant About Word Usage
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:45:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
766 times
|
| |
|
|
Am I the only annoyed by the use of the word "ouster". The definition of this word make no sense when compared to other words with the "-er" suffix. To me the only usage of this word should be in referring to "someone in the process of ousting or has in the past ousted" and not to "the act of ousting". In other words, instead of saying "I call for the CEO's ouster" one should say "I call for the ousting of the CEO" since the former sounds to me like you calling for "the person who ousted/is ousting the CEO".
Sorry for wasting your time, but this is really starting to annoy me and I had
to vent somewhere.
-Orion
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A Small Rant About Word Usage
|
| (...) Isn't Ousterreich near Hungary? They used to be part of the same country, but the former got "Ousted", and thus the name. - Schlickbernd's Insidious Book of Spurious Quotations and Dubious Facts -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 30-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
