Word treasures going at fire-sale prices!

The Monitor’s language columnist is loath to argue against usefulness as a criterion for the vocabulary high-schoolers should acquire; but ‘obscure’ words may be the spices in our verbal stew.

John Nordell
A student pauses while taking a sample SAT test during his test prep class in Newton, Mass.

This space is not usually devoted to retail shopping news, but here’s a tip I have to share: January may be a great time for real bargains in a class of goods widely known as “obscure vocabulary words.” 

The “new” SAT, coming in March, will not include “vocabulary students may not have heard before and are likely not to hear again,” as the College Board put it in a press release back in March 2014. That was when the board announced its overhaul of the test formerly known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, widely used for college admissions in the United States.

The “SAT words” of yore will be gone.

As The New York Times explained, in the new test “the focus will be on what the College Board calls ‘high utility’ words that appear in many contexts, in many disciplines – often with shifting meanings – and they will be tested in context.”

Thus, “[A] question based on a passage about an artist who ‘vacated’ from a tradition of landscape painting, asks whether it would be better to substitute the word ‘evacuated,’ ‘departed’ or ‘retired,’ or to leave the sentence unchanged.” The right answer, for the lifelong learners among us, is “departed.”

Education reporters have been all over this one; it came to my attention only when I spotted a whimsical “Elegy for lost verbiage” in The Economist’s “World in 2016” preview issue.

Far be it from me to argue against utility or context. But my first response here was “Hey, what words are you calling ‘obscure’?”

The words cited in the “Elegy” were picked from widely available sample tests rather than from an official College Board list. Cyndie Schmeiser, the board’s chief of assessment, confirms prevaricator and sagacious as words that will not be found on the new SAT. And she stresses that the new test “will measure students’ understanding of important, widely used words and phrases they will use throughout their lives.”

What does it say, though, about the state of public discourse if nonpartisan is deemed too obscure a term to expect young people to know?

Another word said to be going away is circumlocution. But it is such a perfect word for what people say when they can’t say what they mean: a verbal detour. It comes from Latin words meaning “a speaking around,” and how perfect that it’s five syllables long.

Alacrity is another bit of “verbiage” to be “lost,” regrettably. Derived from Latin and meaning “liveliness” or “eagerness,” it suggests a whip-cracking, “let’s get going” quality.

Or what about obstreperous? From a Latin word meaning “to oppose noisily,” it’s the perfect word for someone who doesn’t go along with the program without making a racket.

These specialized words may be the spices in our verbal stew. You don’t dump them in by the cupful, or even quarter cupful; but if you can’t deploy them one judicious teaspoonful after another, the soup is likely to be rather bland.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Word treasures going at fire-sale prices!
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today