Oops: The use of 'the fact' (that should work)

I forgot about the problem with quotes in subject lines. Perhaps Manny or Chronos can close the other one called “The use of”. Here it is again:

What is the consensus among grammar experts on this phrase? It annoys the poop out of me. People say it way too often. Is it a form of “overnominalization”, making everything into a noun (a “fact”)? Also, it often times refers to something more subjective that a hard fact.
You’re jealous of the fact that I’m smarter than you.
He was annoyed by the fact that he lost the race.
And so on, ad nauseum. I’ve noticed it’s one of those words used by people in debates who aren’t as smart as they hope to come off (similar to the misuse of “myself” and “whom” and preposition-first sentence construction [in which they start correctly…and then end with the preposition anyway!]). But I digress…is this an acceptable practice?

I’m annoyed by the fact that you posted this thread!

Seriously, though…
MR. Webster says that a fact is something that actually occured or exists; something that has real or demostrable existence.

so however annoyed you are the with over use of “the fact”, it seems that in many circumstances its used correctly.

It can be hard to avoid. Sometimes you have to nominalize, and using a gerund seems awkwards sometimes, particularly when in the possessive.

The second example is easy to fix thus: “He was annoyed by his defeat in the race.” It is much better to use a plain old noun, especially in cases like this, than a nominalized verb like a gerund (losing) or infinitive (to lose). The point is, we are lucky there is a “plain old noun” for the verb to lose, there are plenty of verbs where there isn’t one.

You are right about the first example,

… it could use some fixing. But how to fix it is another question - mainly because it’s the smartness that the second person is jealous of, not the smartness differential.
“You are jealous of my superior intelligence.” Ouch. That one is even more arrogant than the parent sentence, but it’s a little less awkward. Still, couldn’t it use more clarity? Superior … to what? To the second person’s. Clarifying that would lead us to the next sentence:
“You are jealous of my intelligence, which is greater than yours.” Better, but sometimes you want to say something without a comma. How about:
“You are jealous of my being smarter than you.” Oooh, a possessive gerund. I use one in my sig line, at least last I checked, but I don’t particularly like them.

Dunno where my copy of Strunk & White is, but I’m pretty sure they take a line against “the fact that” in most circumstances.

It’s just plain excess verbiage most of the time. In the two sentences you use, you could achieve the same result just by omitting the expression:

“You’re jealous that I’m smarter than you.”
“He was annoyed that he lost the race.”

I think it’s the peculiar use of the phrase “the fact that” as a substitute for properly nominalizing certain words that is annoying.

Alternately -
I think it’s the fact that people will sometimes use “the fact that” just because of the fact that they forget how to nominalize words properly, in spite of the fact that “the fact that” can be annoying that is annoying.

Does that make it any clearer?

Is it okay to quote my self?
Who cares!

I said it once and I’ll say it again…
“I’m annoyed by the fact that you posted this thread!”

The Elements of Style, Principles of Composition, Omit needless words

Nurlman makes a good point - it is much more parsimonious to fix “the fact that” by axing “the fact” and leaving the “that”. I guess I was just over-engineering it.

Hey xelakann, you also raise an interesting point. Is it okay to use a sentence, which is formally a question, as a statement? I mean, the question, “Who cares?” can be answered just by reading the names of the respondents. What you really mean is “I don’t care”. You probably aren’t particularly interested though…

[delivers a blistering noogie to xelakann’s scalp]

I hope it’s okay to use rhetorical questions. I use 'em all the time.

Who needs 'em?