Sloppy words inside dogma

wulkowicz

wulkowicz

Location
yes
In the nearby thread on suckers, I had to get to the 6th post to understand they were really talking about watersprouts. I've complained for years about the growing trends to "simplify" words, but I'd still prefer reasonably clear notice of if I'm going to need a shovel or a bucket truck.

Beside the above gross mislabeling, the "functions" of epicormic growth are pretty spongey and slippery as well.

Let's make this a good thread.
cool.gif


Bob Wulkowicz
 
This is very true. I am guilty of this.

I realized my error after it was corrected, as is often the case. The passion moves faster than my vocabulary.

In terms of using the correct vocabulary, you read the context then realized what was being discussed. All good right? You jumped right in there with some very wise words and you write well. Me, not so much. I love it! That is why I participate and ask the question in the first place. The story of the sucker (or what you wish to call it) is not satisfactorily explained yet(to me). Note the varied answers.

Define beautiful - _____. There are many, many words in many languages. Hot comes to mind and paints a picture... Hot historically doesn't mean anything even close to the context.

Language is the tool that we use to communicate. It has no scientific basis. It is truly cultural. The "culture" of EVERYONE is different. This is apparent, though no excuse.

:)

It is a very excellent point!
 
"the "functions" of epicormic growth are pretty spongey and slippery as well."

Well heck, the definition of "epicormic" growth is slippery, so what do you expect? cmon Bob, if they need tightening, pray tell, how?

Constructive input is far preferable to scolding!
 
"sucker" and "sprout" is kind of like "vigor" and "vitality". There is a difference, but it's understandable if someone innocently mixes them up. Correct course, and move on--the first four letters in 'analysis' sometime look like an adjective.

ok maybe scold was a bit strong--though there is a chill in the air today! How about chide - rebuke - reprove - reprimand - reprehend?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Always laughed at that bumper sticker: My Karma ran over your Dogma

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you. Funniest--and most inciteful, thing I've seen all year.

My compliments.


bob w
 
FWIW, when I'm talking to a client and I mention "suckers," they know what I'm talking about. Same goes for "healing" and "feeding." If I start mentioning epicormic growth and the production of parenchymatous cells, I often get funny looks from glassy eyes and I end up backpeddling to explain what I'm trying to tell them. I know the correct terms, but the general public is clueless when it comes to proper arboricultural nomenclature.

Yes, I educate when I feel it's appropriate but most people just want their trees taken care of without a science lecture. As always, there are a few exceptions.

This is my 2 cents based on 30+ years of experience. YMMV.
 
I agree with Brett on that. I use terms like 'heal' or 'seal' with clients to keep CODIT out of the discussion... unless they want to go there.

I try to use 'sprouts' and 'suckers' correctly but many gardeners will call everything suckers so i don't push on it too hard.
 
Sucker is such a casual term, as long as we all know what plant bit we are talking about, it's fine with me.

But Chip, I've crossed swords with you a bit on 'heal' vs 'seal'. I use seal because it's accurate without having to talk about CODIT and just as easy to understand. I guess it's the plant's way of healing if we use the term to mean successful way to deal with an injury, but since it can be confused with regeneration of injured tissue, I don't like to use it. But I bet I do without thinking sometimes anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom