I feel the same way. On principle I couldn’t really say that’s it’s categorically “wrong,” but it bothers me, too. I explained in this earlier thread in more detail why.
My strong gut instinct after extensive consideration is that this use of so is an affectation, and that’s about the only kind of language change I would ever object to. It’s an attempt to “sound like an expert.” Its usage is rapidly expanding because of the very nature of the context in which it occurs (interviews of “experts”). People hear this affectation on TV and radio and they start to subconsciously think, “Oh–experts talk that way, and I guess I should talk that way too, so people think I’m an expert.”
If you notice when other people are interviewed–“non-experts,” people who don’t feel they have to bolster their authority with this linguistic tic–they don’t do this. Movie actors, singers, etc. don’t use so in this way. It’s only the academics, the policy makers, the non-fiction authors–the semi-obscure, so to speak–who do it.
I think it bothers me because I associate that “tic” with Valley-girl-speak, which I in turn associate with vacuousness. I don’t like my talking head experts to sound vacuous.
“So” is no different from the Spanish use of entonces, the Portugues use of entao, or the French use of donc as a verbal crutch. I see it as a word that alerts the listener to pay attention to what is coming after. “So” at the end of a sentence is just laziness, or an attempt to add gravitas to what the speaker has just said, in lieu of actual information.
Okay, but—as we’ve been trying to make clear in all of these threads–we’re not talking about that use of so. (And BTW, that use of *so *is not a “crutch” at all; it’s highly functional, in any language.)
What you’re referring to is the conjunctive use of so. It shows that one proposition is the result of another. In this example it works on the sentence level:
We didn’t have any money so we stayed at home.
What you’re talking about (the equivalent of entonces) is the same thing, but on a discursive level. A person will begin an utterance with this conjunctive so to show that it propositionally follows from what has just been said.
*A: We don’t have any money.
B: So stay at home.
*The particular use of so that we’re discussing in this thread is completely different. Interviewees are using it to introduce a totally new proposition in response to a question. Here’s an example to make it clear:
*A: Why did you stay at home?
B: So we didn’t have any money.
*This is the use we’re discussing in this thread. It would help a lot if folks would keep that in mind so we don’t have to continually clarify this.
(So at the end of a sentence is yet a third, distinct linguistic animal, even less related to what we’re discussing here.)
This is the usage I see in my emails as far back as I can find, so far as I can tell. Emails that start with the word “so,” subjects that are introduced with the word “so.” So, from 2002, I see this:
“So I got the peanut slave & a short male-to-male PC cord to hook it up to the SB-28 and make the sensor directional.”
It is being used int he sense of “well” here. It is my email, and it is the entirety of the email. I assume this is the use being discussed. What about “So what are you doing on your day off?” It that a different “so” or the one we’re discussing? That’s also back from 2002. Or what about “So, last night I was going to the store…”
It says nothing about use in spoken English, or necessarily about its use as a marker, but the mere positioning of ‘so’ at the beginning of a sentence in writing is just recovering from a downward trend that happened in the mid-20th century.
Your post is not out of line (because the OP doesn’t clearly describe the thing that s/he perceives as “new,” as opposed so what people have been doing forever). But it’s not my “pedantry,” either–if you look at the previous threads, or listen to the link, you’ll see the distinction, and why this is even an issue.
This is not the “new” use of so. This is the normal conjunctive use. It makes perfect sense to use so here, because the hook up is an ongoing issue, and your latest actions are a result of some kind of previous discussion that you’ve been having about it.
Yes, it’s like well, but it’s NOT the thing that has people talking. Your use is perfectly normal.
No, these aren’t either. This use of so, as you point out, has been a common discourse marker for as long as I can tell. It’s used to indicate that the two speakers are familiar with each other, and the person who says it is marking that familiarity by using so. Think of it like this: [FRIEND MODE]So, … ,[/FRIEND MODE]
It’s true that the OP kind of lumps all the uses of so together in his/her description, but the point of the OP is that there is something new now, happening more frequently, and the OP isn’t the first to observe it, as the previous threads indicate, as well as the regular review by Harry Shearer.
Remember, we’re specifically talking about answering an interviewer’s query. Imagine a conversation like this:
*A: Do you come here often?
B: So I come by from time to time, after work.
A: Yeah, me too. What do you do?
B: So I’m a cashier.
A: Really? Where?
B: So I work at the boutique up the street.
A: Cool. I like that place. What’s it called again?
B: So it’s called “Y Que?”
A: Right! I can never remember it. Have you been there long?
B: So I started there last August.
A: Nice. Haven’t I seen you at the college?
B: So yes, I’m a student, too.
A: Yeah, me too. What do you study?
B: So I study theater.
*
This is what’s new. This is the way that interviews on TV and radio are starting to sound like, MORE and MORE.
No, but I assumed that was an exaggerated example. I’ve never literally heard someone respond to questions with seven short sentences in a row with “so.” Nor “well.” Nor any other hesitation word. But, yes, I would use “so” in that way quite often, and I find myself editing it out of colloquial email correspondence when I see three or four paragraphs in a row start with “so.”
I find I use it when I am going to explain more than what the direct question I am posed is asking for. It’s a shorthand for signaling I am going to be giving more background and then getting to the answer.
I found for awhile that “Look,” played the same role for interviewees on things like The Daily Show or pundit shows. They were about to expand on ideas and then get to the actual answer to the question.
Well, obviously I’m not going to go dig up the transcript of an interview about, say, global warming, and type out the complete answers. But the length of the response is not the issue. They DO begin every answer with so–they just have longer responses.
Look, this is something you’re not going to even notice unless you listen to a lot of news interviews. (Have you listened to the examples on Le Show cited upthread?)
It doesn’t make any sense to try to imagine yourself doing it in day-to-day interaction, or to look at your personal emails. You can’t compare them. I’m talking about people who get interviewed in the media about public policy or science news.
Beginning three or four paragraphs with so, again, is not the same thing. That’s an extended consideration of a single, larger topic–and each paragraph is not a direct response to a question. It can make perfectly good sense to begin those paragraphs with so. Look at the conversation above more carefully. You’ll notice that each question is a new topic. It’s totally different.
Scoff. Look at me. I still say “hwæt” when I need to insert a pause or start a new topic. It’s a perfectly cromulent word and I don’t know why it’s gone out of fashion.
Well, no. I use “so” to introduce new topics in the paragraphs–it’s not the extension of a single, larger topic. But it sounds like something you seem to be saying only occurs in speech or conversations. I can find examples in my emails that are direct answers to questions that do follow your pattern (Q:“What’s new with you?” A: “So I’ve been seeing this girl…”) I guess it’s just not anything I’ve noticed in my dialect, but it’s certainly possible that it’s been expanding in the broader sense, and I’m not noticing it because it’s just normal in my speech and the speech of my peers. Yes, I did listen to the Le Show clip, and that sounds perfectly normal to me.
My posting style here is less conversational than my emails. I definitely “speak” in a different register here. It’s not formal, but it’s at least one notch up in formality from my day-to-day speech, which is full of “ums,” “sos,” “yeahs,” “likes,” “wells,” “ya knows,” and the such.
I delete it when I see myself using the same words to start paragraph after paragraph. I do the same thing with the word “well” and “yeah.” I do not eliminate all instances of it–just repetitive ones. I do not feel it’s wrong–just when I have the luxury of editing, I like to tighten up the prose somewhat. Like I said, I don’t excessively include other hesitation words in my writing, either.
This is one, single conversation. You begin everything you say with “so”?