Peter Johnson, of Broad Bay, raises the question of "alternate" versus "alternative". He sees American English as behind the lack of distinction.
Civis is most comfortable with "alternative", apart from a couple of exceptions. One is referring to alternating electric currents (AC as distinct from direct current DC), not that there’s any need to refer to these in everyday life.
The other parallels the alternating-current idea, "succeeding in turns". Civis appears in the ODT every week. That would instead be on "alternate" weeks if the column was published every second Saturday, although "alternative" weeks would also work.
"Alternate", meaning occurring in turns — first one then the other and back again — has been a common traditional usage view. "Alternative" has been for when there’s a choice.
Currently, though, it seems "alternate" and "alternative" as adjectives are alternatives, no matter what Civis or Peter might prefer. They’re synonyms. Most distinctions have been lost.
However, as a noun — as in "these are the alternatives" — "alternates" usually falls well behind.
Traditionalists might also argue "alternatives" are only a two-way choice, one or the other. Another word like "options" should be used if there are several choices. Common usage suggests that’s another language war where today’s battalions have overrun any regimented army of the past.
Sometimes, one alternative takes over on specific occasions. We always speak of "alternative" (not "alternate") medicine.
Both words go back to the middle of the 16th century.
* * * * *
John Burton, rightfully, is irritated by the word super as in "super important". He heard it on both radio and television on the same day. He supposes it’s a substitute for what he would call "extremely" important.
Yolanda van Heezik’s No 1 language gripe is the mispronunciation of "women" by so many women on radio and TV, including reporters and even by educated women advocating for women.
The plural women should not be said in the same way as the singular "woman", Yolanda insists. Agreed.
The first syllable, meanwhile, can be especially difficult for non-native English speakers. It can often come out as "woo"men.
By the way, Civis always thought the beginning of "dynasty" was pronounced as in the word din, a loud noise. Instead, Civis has been hearing more often "dynasty" starting the same way as in the word dinosaur.
This is yet another case when United States English is trumping (excuse the pun) British and New Zealand language use. The "din is nasty" to Civis’ ears.
Are the antediluvial reactions of Civis another pointer to the fact that Civis should be banished to the Triassic, Jurassic or Cretaceous eras?
Surely, though, Civis is right to be cantankerous when someone calling himself a communications expert used the word optionality. Surely, there is an alternative (or an alternate). Surely, there are other options.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, optionality first appeared in 1817. Its use in English began a steady climb from about the 1930s. Unfortunately, the upward trajectory continues.
* * * * *
It’s been said before and it needs to be said again. The key to widespread public transport use is reliability.
Civis heard of the case a few weeks ago when someone from Arrowtown — who used to take buses — thought he would do so again.
Lo and behold, he arrived at the stop to find the bus to Queenstown had left early. The next bus would not leave for another hour, and he would be well late for work.
Guess who is likely to avoid public transport for another long spell.
