Difference between revisions of "Quizbowlese"
Jeff Hoppes (talk | contribs) |
Matt Weiner (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The pejorative term "'''quizbowlese'''" is used to refer to formulaic phrases or words that recur much more often in quizbowl question writing than anywhere else. The overuse of quizbowlese prose makes quizbowl questions harder to read and makes it more difficult for new players to understand what their moderator is asking them. | The pejorative term "'''quizbowlese'''" is used to refer to formulaic phrases or words that recur much more often in quizbowl question writing than anywhere else. The overuse of quizbowlese prose makes quizbowl questions harder to read and makes it more difficult for new players to understand what their moderator is asking them. | ||
− | Examples of quizbowlese | + | ==Examples of quizbowlese, by category== |
+ | |||
+ | Ranked from least to most odious using a "how likely is this to drive people away from quizbowl" standard: | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Inside baseball=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: Constructions that are valid English but that many non-quizbowl-veterans are unlikely to know the meaning of | ||
+ | |||
+ | Examples: | ||
+ | |||
+ | *use of "[multiply]-eponymous" | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Stupid lingo=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: Words that are used correctly, but introduce imprecision or dullness to questions for no reason | ||
+ | |||
+ | Examples: | ||
+ | |||
*overuse of the word "work" to describe books, paintings, symphonies, treatises, etc.<br> | *overuse of the word "work" to describe books, paintings, symphonies, treatises, etc.<br> | ||
*in a similar vein, using "polity," "entity," "figure," etc. as the only noun describing the answer<br> | *in a similar vein, using "polity," "entity," "figure," etc. as the only noun describing the answer<br> | ||
+ | *connecting unrelated sentences with "In addition to <title>, ..." or "Besides..."<br> | ||
+ | *linking unrelated clauses mid-sentence with "and" or "while"<br> | ||
+ | *constructions designed to avoid "transparency" that go so far as to become useless, e.g. "this ruler once went to battle in order to prevent another polity from performing a certain action" | ||
+ | *use of "would" or "would go onto" instead of the simple past tense | ||
+ | *overuse of "following" where "after" is both easier to understand and faster to read | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Stylistic failure=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: Technically valid but subpar usage that creates confusion about what is being described | ||
+ | |||
+ | Examples: | ||
+ | |||
*overuse of the verb "sees", e.g. "This novel sees one character host lavish parties in West Egg." | *overuse of the verb "sees", e.g. "This novel sees one character host lavish parties in West Egg." | ||
− | |||
− | |||
*using the standalone adjective "this" or "these" as a noun<br> | *using the standalone adjective "this" or "these" as a noun<br> | ||
*use of "namesake" in ways that are ambiguous as to which item is or was named after another | *use of "namesake" in ways that are ambiguous as to which item is or was named after another | ||
− | * | + | *compulsive verbal tics that add confusion or superfluous words to phrases ("main protagonist" instead of "protagonist", "centers around" instead of "centers on", "in the novel in which he appears" instead of "the novel" or nothing) |
− | * | + | |
+ | ===Remedial English failure=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: Outright incorrect word usage or sentence arrangement | ||
+ | |||
+ | Examples: | ||
+ | |||
+ | *overusing the adjective "[[titular]]" in place of the adjective "title"<br> | ||
*use of "protagonist" to mean "character" (also explains the rise of the inane construction "the main protagonist") | *use of "protagonist" to mean "character" (also explains the rise of the inane construction "the main protagonist") | ||
− | |||
*giveaways that are neither a question nor a statement ("For 10 points, name this first President of the United States" is acceptable; "For 10 points, this first President of the United States." is not) | *giveaways that are neither a question nor a statement ("For 10 points, name this first President of the United States" is acceptable; "For 10 points, this first President of the United States." is not) | ||
*use of "For 10 points" as a conjunction, e.g. "An opponent of the Levellers at the Putney Debates, for 10 points, name this Roundhead general who became Lord Protector of England." | *use of "For 10 points" as a conjunction, e.g. "An opponent of the Levellers at the Putney Debates, for 10 points, name this Roundhead general who became Lord Protector of England." | ||
*apposition of freestanding proper nouns at the end of sentences, rather than finding a natural word order whereby the noun is at the end of the sentence (example pulled by [[Rob Carson]] out of EFT 2009: "One visitor to this polity’s capital described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, Zhou Daguan." as opposed to "One visitor to this polity's capital, ''who'' described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, ''was'' Zhou Daguan" or similar fixes) | *apposition of freestanding proper nouns at the end of sentences, rather than finding a natural word order whereby the noun is at the end of the sentence (example pulled by [[Rob Carson]] out of EFT 2009: "One visitor to this polity’s capital described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, Zhou Daguan." as opposed to "One visitor to this polity's capital, ''who'' described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, ''was'' Zhou Daguan" or similar fixes) | ||
− | |||
*referring to any written work as a "novel" regardless of length or fictional status | *referring to any written work as a "novel" regardless of length or fictional status | ||
*referring to any married person as a "wife" regardless of gender | *referring to any married person as a "wife" regardless of gender | ||
− | |||
*confusion about what "nations," "states," and "countries" are | *confusion about what "nations," "states," and "countries" are | ||
− | |||
*use of "one" as an indefinite article instead of "a" or "an" | *use of "one" as an indefinite article instead of "a" or "an" | ||
− | + | ||
+ | ===Navelgazing=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: Attempting to say "I don't know what this has to do with my question, but it's appeared in a lot of questions on this topic before so you should buzz on it" without actually saying that | ||
+ | |||
+ | Example: | ||
+ | |||
+ | *saying that the answer to the question is "associated with" some other thing |
Revision as of 17:13, 5 February 2013
The pejorative term "quizbowlese" is used to refer to formulaic phrases or words that recur much more often in quizbowl question writing than anywhere else. The overuse of quizbowlese prose makes quizbowl questions harder to read and makes it more difficult for new players to understand what their moderator is asking them.
Examples of quizbowlese, by category
Ranked from least to most odious using a "how likely is this to drive people away from quizbowl" standard:
Inside baseball
Definition: Constructions that are valid English but that many non-quizbowl-veterans are unlikely to know the meaning of
Examples:
- use of "[multiply]-eponymous"
Stupid lingo
Definition: Words that are used correctly, but introduce imprecision or dullness to questions for no reason
Examples:
- overuse of the word "work" to describe books, paintings, symphonies, treatises, etc.
- in a similar vein, using "polity," "entity," "figure," etc. as the only noun describing the answer
- connecting unrelated sentences with "In addition to <title>, ..." or "Besides..."
- linking unrelated clauses mid-sentence with "and" or "while"
- constructions designed to avoid "transparency" that go so far as to become useless, e.g. "this ruler once went to battle in order to prevent another polity from performing a certain action"
- use of "would" or "would go onto" instead of the simple past tense
- overuse of "following" where "after" is both easier to understand and faster to read
Stylistic failure
Definition: Technically valid but subpar usage that creates confusion about what is being described
Examples:
- overuse of the verb "sees", e.g. "This novel sees one character host lavish parties in West Egg."
- using the standalone adjective "this" or "these" as a noun
- use of "namesake" in ways that are ambiguous as to which item is or was named after another
- compulsive verbal tics that add confusion or superfluous words to phrases ("main protagonist" instead of "protagonist", "centers around" instead of "centers on", "in the novel in which he appears" instead of "the novel" or nothing)
Remedial English failure
Definition: Outright incorrect word usage or sentence arrangement
Examples:
- overusing the adjective "titular" in place of the adjective "title"
- use of "protagonist" to mean "character" (also explains the rise of the inane construction "the main protagonist")
- giveaways that are neither a question nor a statement ("For 10 points, name this first President of the United States" is acceptable; "For 10 points, this first President of the United States." is not)
- use of "For 10 points" as a conjunction, e.g. "An opponent of the Levellers at the Putney Debates, for 10 points, name this Roundhead general who became Lord Protector of England."
- apposition of freestanding proper nouns at the end of sentences, rather than finding a natural word order whereby the noun is at the end of the sentence (example pulled by Rob Carson out of EFT 2009: "One visitor to this polity’s capital described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, Zhou Daguan." as opposed to "One visitor to this polity's capital, who described how its women are oversexed and age about twice as quickly as Chinese women, was Zhou Daguan" or similar fixes)
- referring to any written work as a "novel" regardless of length or fictional status
- referring to any married person as a "wife" regardless of gender
- confusion about what "nations," "states," and "countries" are
- use of "one" as an indefinite article instead of "a" or "an"
Definition: Attempting to say "I don't know what this has to do with my question, but it's appeared in a lot of questions on this topic before so you should buzz on it" without actually saying that
Example:
- saying that the answer to the question is "associated with" some other thing