Posted in Linguistic Annoyances at 14:22 on 28 August 2008
I heard young Tom Daley, the Olympic diver, use the expression âtimes it byâ in a TV interview after his event.
Times it by? Times it by?
What superannuated numpty taught him this phrase?
Why employ it at all when there is a perfectly usable adult word, the proper mathematical term, which someone of 14 years of age â hell half that â ought to have no problems in using if they had been told it properly in the first place?
I assume the thinking process behind employing this horrible construction is that âmultiplyâ is too complicated a word for children to cope with.
But why is it necessary to talk down to children in this way?
Does it really make the manipulation (sorry, I used a five syllable word there; I of course meant times-it-bying, only four syllables after all) easier for a child to understand by describing it in a childish way?
I know we refer to times tables, but the process is not called timesing, is it? (See how ugly this becomes?)
In any case it might be better to say, for example, 4 lots of 6 make 24, or four multiples of 6 give you 24, rather than 4 times 6 is 24.
Even if “times it by” were generated by children themselves they ought to have been told, “We don’t say that. We say multiply instead,” in much the same way you would correct a child who said buyed in place of bought.
Think how different phraseology would have been if this ugly usage had always been in vogue.
Be fruitful and times-it-by; and replenish the Earth? Hardly trips off the tongue.
Bobby Darin got it correct.
Multiplication. That’s the name of the game.
Tags: Linguistic Annoyances