Hacker News Reader

Comment by XJOKOLAT | Hacker News Reader

On the subject of language overuse:

So ... why does everyone start a sentence with "So". Both verbally and in written media. This has bugged me for quite a while.

I've also been indoctrinated into it's use. It definitely assists conversation but ...

"Exactly" is another one (in London anyway). Recently "exactly" has come to mean absolutely anything. E.g. "I don't know what you're talking about but I'll say 'exactly' and nod my head as a lead in to what I want to say' or just to be sounding like I'm still in the conversation"

Weird how words like these become viral.

Mild rant over.

View on HN

NPR has a good article about the "So" thing: http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/432732859/so-whats-the-big-dea...

I'm not quite sure what you mean be 'exactly'? I thought at first you meant e.g. "I'm not exactly sure what you mean" - but you mention at the start? (Also London, just haven't noticed I suppose).

Regarding the use of 'So..' to lead in a sentence: this is an hideous Americanism that must be stopped from further penetrating our borders at all cost. I exaggerate, of course. But it is an Americanism; I do not like it.

I also don't like "So". But in spoken communication it's a good way to get somebody to stop looking at their phone for a split second so you can start telling them what you want to say.

It's a less obnoxious way of saying "Hey you". Because saying "Hey you" when you're standing in front of somebody, a foot away, at conversational distance, and you were both just conversing two minutes ago is weird. But necessary. Because phones.

"Exactly. Leading 'so' is a terrible thing, but I think the proliferation of the stand-alone 'day of' is worse."

That 'exactly' is used to acknowledge what someone said and then to lead in to a related but different thing. Or sometimes as just the acknowledgement.

Leading 'so' seems to me to be a softener. "So...that's not what I meant, but it's reasonable", "So...here's what I've got. Tell me what you think", "So...we've got a problem.". I don't think anyone uses leading 'so' to say something positive except to ironically lower expectations. "So...we just signed a million-dollar contract".

It gives people a chance to realize that something else is coming that's not wholly positive, I think. I don't really know. It's something I've picked up in SF and I use it all the time even though I'm fully conscious of how strange it sounds.

I understand why they are used, but the extent troubles me.

I hear it so often sometimes that it's like a flashing command-prompt in a conversation.

I can't stand English language purists. It is akin to xenophobic Americans: comically hypocritical.

If so makes conversation easier, what's the harm? That you and some others think it sounds uneducated?

>I can't stand English language purists. It is akin to xenophobic Americans: comically hypocritical.

Not that I agree with either group, but it's not exactly hypocritical what they say.

Saying X is bad while yourself adopting it would indeed be hypocritical. But saying X is OK up to your (or your generation), but bad if it continues is merely selfish or conservative.

It's more like them saying "it stops here", is in the first case "selfish" (since they're in, but want others out) and in the second case "conservative" (since they inherited an impure language, but want to stop it from evolving), but not necessarily hypocritical.

It's not illogical either: just because something started as "X" ("a nation of immigrants" for America, "an impure mix of words and linguistic influence" for the English language) it's not a logical necessity that it should continue to be so ad infinitum.

"So" is quicker than "Therefore" or "In conclusion" or "Because of that" and so on. In conversation, people want you to get to the point quickly. One syllable "so" gets the job done. Yes, it's overused. Grammatically, there's nothing wrong with it.

>So ... why does everyone start a sentence with "So". Both verbally and in written media. This has bugged me for quite a while.

Verbally, because it signals you're speaking and gives you a little time to think your next words (like "eeer", "mmm", etc we also say).

"So" indicates a change in direction in a conversation. It's mostly used to start a summarization or a change of subject. It prompts the listener to stop thinking about the old subject and pay attention to the new.

I get 'so' in conversation, but I despise it in internet posts. On reddit it indicates that there is a 99% likelihood that what you are about to read is a repost.

The opening "so" is language cancer, that's why it spreads uncontrollably.

Wouldn't that be, kind of the other way around?

It spreading uncontrollably would be it being language cancer?

What it would be for it to be language cancer would be for it to spread uncontrollably?

It seems sort of like a definitional thing, rather than a cause and effect thing, or even logical implication?

They seem like different words that mean the same thing, I.e. synonyms.

To say that it is one because it is the other is like to say that blue is blue because it is blue.

Which, is true in a sense, I suppose, but seems a little odd.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com