Unnecessary words are those that have a perfect substitution, they don’t add anything to the language other than to show off a good vocabulary. They can be substituted using much more common words that are easier to remember, more commonly used, easier to pronounce, don’t sound stupid, and have fewere syllables.
I’ll probably think of some of my own later, but I just wanted to show my support for the banishing of “copacetic”. It doesn’t even sound like the kind of thing it is. It sounds like it should mean something like antiseptic.
Nonsense. Writing can engage the reader and come to life if written well. Learn how to write better and you will come to appreciate the many choices that the English language offers.
Not the answer you’re looking for, but one man’s “Overly complicated words which have simpler synonyms” is another person’s “Dumbing down the English language”…
Hey, ‘copacetic’ is perfectly cromulent. Back off of that word. You want to pick on a word? Pick on ‘rural’. There is no excuse for a word to force you to concentrate with the focus of a Buddhist monk in order to pronounce it correctly.
But aren’t “copacetic” and “discombobulated” joke words that were made up to make fun of fancy words? It seems weird that you would pick those two to hate, because I think they’re on your side.
Are you against, opposed to, anti-, averse to synonyms in general?
Word choice sets tone. That’s why sometimes someone is bewildered, and sometimes discombobulated. There’s just enough difference between the two that the reader will get a different impression of the scene.
I remember people on the Dope claiming this before, (possibly discussing the Rural Juror episode of 30 Rock) and I don’t get it. do Americans pronounce the word in a weird way or something? In UK English it’s very simple: rurr-rool, (to rhyme with purr-wool). I’ve never heard anyone have a problem with that word.