Apart from news and views on media covering tourism, travel, and hospitality, writers, editors, photogs, and bloggers share tips, leads, ideas, news, gripes. PR reps/journos ISO press releases/trips, see also "PR/Marketing." Opinions stated are not necessarily those of Tripatini.
Cover photo: seb_ra
Comments
As to the New York accent, I listen to it just with great affection nowadays.:) There's nothing special or real about being genericized. For me, accents evoke time, place, specificity, and especially memories.
Made multiple trips
It aired for months
how ATT wasn't
Blush.
I hear OMG spoken as dialogue in quite a few television programs.
Evelyn and I (added by another friend from the St. Kitts trip) could probably form a hit squad to garotte the 'like' people. Three years ago I sat at a table with the editor of a trendy magazine who spoke only Valley Girl. Cripes, the Valley is so passe. Thank gawd the meal was a buffet so several of us many multiple trips just to get away from this non-stop mouth.
A few years ago there was an ATT commercial which cracked me up. It aided for months. ATT was being more personal. So they had this young man, who was identified as an account manager, speaking how how ATT wasn't the big company that didn't care. It was just a lot of people working to make communications better. Bottom line, "it's just two people interfacing with each other." (Have I mentioned the 14-month battle I've been having with Bell?)
Hal, as one who was born and raised in New York City, I see little downside to the loss of accents. Or mine, anyway. But hark! You've said something else that I want to address: "the longer-term incorporation of expressions and words into the mainstream of the language." That leads me to ask, to what extent have you folks incorporated shorthand like IMHO or the short list of hot modifiers (e.g. "totally") into your travel writing?
Great comments on the OMG-in-the-dictionary phenomenon, guys. I just checked, BTW, in Merriam-Webster.com and found that they too include all these abbreviations. And I think (do correct me if I'm wrong) that dictionaries have long included important or frequently used abbreviations and acronyms. But that doesn't make them words. They are abbreviations used in writing. I doubt even the hippest text messager would say "O-M-G" in conversation, unless s/he were being intentionally cute or obnoxious. And IMHO, to be a full-fledged word with all rights and responsibilities inherent thereto, a word must be used, or potentially usable, in spoken language. Now, I know some of you are going to say that the passé simple in French is a verb tense only used in literary writing, and yes, I'll agree, these are bona-fide words nonetheless. But abbreviations are different... aren't they?
Hang on, what am I saying?? I've caught myself using "re" instead of "about" in conversation, as in, "What'd you think re that email I sent you yesterday?" Like it or not, we're on a slippery slope. The beast is out of the box, and he ain't going back in. Fact is, "re" may well knock "about" into the "archaic" category of the dictionary 50 years from now. Is that a good, a bad, or a neutral thing? I'm still trying to figure that one out; but I won't deny that language has to evolve; otherwise we'd all still be speaking Old English, and if you've ever taken a look at Beowulf, you know that's no picnic.