There are some words that occur primarily, if not exclusively, in academic discourse. Discourse might be one of those words.
Another one of those words is problematize.
In academia, we problematize things. Outside of academia, we probably just “trouble” them. The word “problematize”—in other words, “to render something problematic”—first occurs in English near the beginning of the twentieth century, according to the Oxford English Dictionary.
Now there are people who don’t like “problematize,” who don’t see it as part of a long history of -ize words in English. We have several centuries of -ize verbs in English, both from nouns and from adjectives, either borrowed from Latin or derived in English using the Latin suffix (which itself was originally from Greek).
We also have a long history of people criticizing -ize verbs.
So for example, Benjamin Franklin, in 1760, in a letter to David Hume, says that he gives up the verb colonize because he sees it as bad. Now, we now see this concern as quaint, but the complaints keep going. In the New York Times, in the year 2000, Edward Rothstein wrote an article in which he criticized incentivize as “boorish, bureaucratic mis-speak.”
It’s important to remember when we see a criticism like that of incentivize that that criticism will probably seem as quaint in 50 or 100 years as the criticism of colonize seems to us today.
What do you think? Do you “-ize”? Or do you dislike those new verb forms? Which are your favorites? Which drive you crazy? Share your thoughts in the comments.
This video, produced by Rob Hess, originally appeared in LSA Wire, where you can find an archive of Ann Curzan’s videos on language.
Susan Bearman - 1983
The first time I read the word “ideate” (in a job posting), I thought it was made up industry jargon. It’s still grating on my ears, especially since there are so many evocative synonyms: conceive, conjure, dream, envision, fantasize, imagine, picture, see, and visualize all seem more beautiful to me than ideate.
Reply
Perry Ballard - 1966, 1967
Problematize is an example of the “witch doctor” words social, economic and educational groups use to maintain power. Just as the witch doctor was the only one powerful enough to “read the bones”, slang gives minority groups secret powers. Educators don’t speak with one another, they have discourse. Then those same people wonder why young students don’t grasp concepts. Duh!
Reply
Virginia Laetz - '88
I don’t mind the “-ize” words as much as “-wise” words. People add “-wise” to just about any word and it is accepted. I suppose in time language changes and we can’t do much about it.
Reply
Gaberiel Keway - 2006
To me “ize” words seem a low brow method of creating generally poor quality academic and political buzz words; regardless of the era.
Comparatively, I feel that politically tied buzz language is used to persuade public opinion through confusion; most often by means of fear mongering and hate garnering. On the other hand, academic buzz language seems to carry a connotation of haute and pomposity which acts to belittle those who aren’t keen to the [essentially just made up] definition and usage of the words.
While the coining of terminology in the realm of art and fiction can be a definite presentation of creative thinking, I feel that more often than not the use of unofficial language is just a sign of ineptitude and ignorance.
Reply
Bill Clayton
The English language is wonderfully rich because it’s organic — it evolves, and ‘ize words are probably part of that evolution. But I hate them — they’re lazy and sometimes obscurize a word, meaningwise. Shakespeare invented dozens — maybe hundreds of words — but he created them to express something in a new way and, in the process, expand meaning. -ize words don’t expand meaning; they’re a word form used by speakers who want to add shades of meaning, but are unable to express what they’re thinking. (Here’s a snobby opinion: They’re the same people who say “between you and I” and think it’s correct.)
Reply
David Wynn - 1993
Utilize is a dreadful word.
Reply
Lee Wetherhorn - 1962
My personal feeling is that “ize” verbs are something to be avoided. But they don’t irritate me as much as the way so many people start speaking with “like”.
Reply
Bob Halstead
There are many conditions or events that we cannot prevent or whose correct resolution is not universally agreed: wars, poverty, the denial of rights to various groups, the musicals of Andrew Lloyd Webber. Why is the use of language the one area where this difficulty leads people to shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, I guess we just can’t do anything about it?” We can (and should) continue to insist that we use our existing language to express ourselves, unless what we’re saying really does require a new word. Is there an instance where adding “ize” to a word did allow us to communcate something we previously could not?
Reply
Alex Yeilding - 1974
Interesting to see the use of “criticize” and “criticism” several times, and not as examples, in the article about “ize” words. Ize words don’t bother me except when their utilization (“use”?) seems to be motivated only by the desire for a $5 word when a simpler word will do fine.
Reply
Andrew Raybould
I willingly accept new words or usage where they serve a purpose that could otherwise only be met awkwardly, but all too often they arise out of ignorance: I have yet to see or hear ‘incentivize’ or ‘incent’ being used in a situation where ‘encourage’ would not have been perfectly adequate.
I have to admit that this irritates me more than I can rationally justify, but I think it comes down to two things that matter: firstly, I suspect that people using unnecessary neologisms do so because they do not read much, and so are probably poorly informed; secondly, it suggests that the writer is self-absorbed: like Carroll’s Humpty-Dumpty, he thinks it is sufficient that he knows what he means, and is not paying attention to conveying precise meaning to his readers.
I realize that both of these concerns are moot once a word becomes widely used, but I am left with the feeling that there is an underlying trend towards regarding language only as a vehicle for emotional states, rather than as being capable of specific meaning. This is a much broader concern than one over unnecessary neologisms, and the evidence for it is broader too; there are many examples in the changed nature of political discourse and reporting, for example.
Reply
Maria C - 1993
I appreciate this column, but I’m troubled by the non-academic synonym suggested for “problematize.” Having spent some time in academe myself, I am fairly certain that “trouble” is not an accurate synonym for this word. To problematize something is to call it into question, to make an issue of it, to insist that it be approached and analyzed skeptically. To trouble something… well, we don’t really trouble *things* at all. Situations can trouble *people,* as in “He was deeply troubled by the incident.”
I’d love to hear other perspectives, but that’s my take on this lexicographical issue… I guess you could say that, with all due respect, I’d like to problematize the author’s use of the word “trouble.”
Reply