Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
We're all familiar with the incorrect use of "well" vs. "good." The phrase "I feel well" and "I feel good" have two different meanings, and I thought this matter was settled long ago. Even though in popular usage the two are often interchanged.
But in last Sunday's Arizona Republic they ran an article titled Gain Notice by Speaking Well. That just doesn't sound correct to my ears. Gain Notice by Speaking Good is obviously wrong, unless the Good is followed by English (making Good an adjective). But in the article title Good is an adverb.
Personally, I'd have used Gain Notice by Speaking Correctly, or maybe even Properly. I know newspapers often bend the rules for article titles. Or is the usage changing? Anyone else have an opinion on this?
I wouldn't have said that in popular usage "good" and "well" are interchanged; I'd have said "good" is often substituted for "well", never the other way around. And twenty years ago I'd have said that the good/well battle was lost; but nowadays sometimes I think I see "well" making a comeback. Maybe it's just because I'm a grownup now, and am with grownups more than when I was an adolescent.
For what it's worth, though (not very much in my opinion), "Gain Notice by Speaking Well" sounds fine to my ear. "Well" is an adverb, right? As you say, "good" would obviously have been wrong.
By the way, I think the reason they bend the rules for headlines is that headlines are much more constrained by space considerations. "Correctly" takes up a lot more width than "Well" when you're in 108-point Times.
If the article was about grammer, proper sentence formation and the like, I would have called that "speaking correctly." To me, there's a significant difference between speaking well and speaking correctly. (Oddly, "properly" sounds a bit British to me - probably just me)
Speaking correctly simply means that your grammar and word use is correct. It only guarantees that your listeners won't be distracted by poor grammar.
Speaking well is reaching, communicating, compelling and moving.
Anyone can find plenty of examples of speaking correctly, but speaking poorly. Would it be too cynical of me to cite all but a few political speeches as examples?
For examples of speaking incorrectly, but speaking well, check out the books Push, or Emergence, or the poem Home by Edgar Guest.
It's a worthwhile distinction, though I don't blame the headline writer for ignoring it and sticking to the shorter word. I'd have to disagree with you about political speeches, though: I imagine the cynicism you mention is not in your opinion about them now but in your attitude when you listen to them, for political speeches, perhaps more than any other genre taken generally, are about speaking well (in your sense). I don't have to agree with their sentiments—I've trained myself in cynicism too—but they are certainly designed to reach, communicate, compel and move, and for the most part designed well.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)