Wednesday, October 19, 2005

The "ize" Have It

Yesterday my company went through a major reorganization (read: people got canned).
For the most part I remain largely unaffected by it, though in my department there was an actual reorganization in which different groups were brought together under one umbrella, and the amount of canning involved was minimal.
What does this mean for the future? It’s difficult to say, though I did go in for a meeting in which some aspects of the change were laid out, though clearly there’s still much that’s up in the air.
It looks as though for the foreseeable future my current position will remain largely unchanged, unless I choose to seek out one of the other opportunities that may present itself to me as part of this reorganization.
There’s really only one concern I have abut it all, as they are talking, in a general sense, about changing the current shift set-up. I can only hope that whatever changes they introduce will not involve having to move from a three day work week to a four day, or – God forbid – a five day work week…
It had been my hope that when I returned from the meeting there would be a note on my door from UPS indicating that my computer was waiting for me at the office, but no such luck. That’s hardly surprising, though; hope and I are two things that should probably stay as far away from each other as possible…
As long-time Threshold readers know, I’m pretty much opposed to the very concept of keeping pets, so certainly you’ll never see me at the store picking up kitty litter or flea collars.
However, over the years there have been a number of stray peeves and gripes that I’ve taken in and cared for, some of which I’ve nurtured well into their maturity.
The latest hungry peeve to show up on my doorstep is the practice of adding the suffix “ize” to words in order to form a new word.
This is becoming an extremely common practice in the business world, taking over for the equally annoying practice of adding “wise” to words (“What’s this going to cost us, money-wise?” “Anyone know how things are looking weather-wise?” “How much are we going to need to invest time-wise?” Note that there are much easier – and less idiotic – things that you could say, language-wise, to get the same idea across. “How much will this cost?” “What’s the weather like?” “How long will this take?”)
At work I’ve repeatedly encountered one such victim of this word mangling: processize. It means to implement an idea as a work process, but to my ear it just sounds ridiculous, and I’m of the opinion that there just has to be a better way to express the same idea.
I was thinking about this when I was out on my morning walk and I found myself actually engaging in the act of “izing.”
A few days ago I came up with and idea that involved making use of a wiki (I love the URL in that link; it’s too bad there isn’t a third “wiki”in it to make it wiki wiki wiki, for anyone out there who may remember the song “Jam On It.”)
The basic idea is pretty cool, I think, but actually implementing it would take a lot of time and effort, so I was trying to come up with a way in which I could – ugh – monetize the idea.
Actually, “monetize” isn’t too bad a word, as it does get the idea across, but even so, as soon as I thought it I found my mind hurtling off track and I began thinking about the annoying tendency that people have to suffixize.
And what, you may wonder, is this great idea I have involving a wiki? Well, you’re just going to have to keep wonderizing, as I’m going to continue to secretize it while I considerize my options…
In all honesty, though, the “ize” thing isn’t nearly as irritating as the media adding “gate” to the name of every political scandal. It was called the Watergate Hotel, you jackasses. Woodward and Bernstein didn’t just arbitrarily tack on a suffix: it was already part of the name.
So enough with the Iran-Contragates, and the stained dressgates, and the no weapons of mass destructiongates already.
Beyond the meeting and my computer continuing to not arrive, today was pretty uneventful, so I think that will do it for this entry.

No comments: