"As we said in Sept/Oct 2013, this is a raging
fad word. It's even worse now. Why? TV news?
Magazines? Books? NO ONE says
"some" or "many" or "a number of" or "a
few" or "more than one" or "several". Everyone
falls back on "multiple". People think in
cliches. Most people have a pitifully small
working vocabulary. They don't know many
words; they have to overuse the few they do
know -- stretch their meaning. And of course
"multiple" is vague and inexact to begin
with, so it covers a lack of knowledge. In
other words, like most overused words, it is
a sign of laziness. People who use it are lazy
writers and lazy thinkers. They also probably
think long words are more impressive than
short words, which is not the case".
-- from American Record Guide March/April 2026
I'll have to counter part of this argument
as Internal Affairs to his Word Police; the editor
uses absolute statements, which is cliched and
misleading. Consider possible reviews of his
statement:
NO ONE cares about this.
EVERYONE cares about this.
Pluted Pup:
"As we said in Sept/Oct 2013, this is a raging
fad word.-a It's even worse now.-a Why? TV news?
Magazines? Books?-a NO ONE says
"some" or "many" or "a number of" or "a
few" or "more than one" or "several".-a Everyone
falls back on "multiple".-a People think in
cliches.-a Most people have a pitifully small
working vocabulary.-a They don't know many
words; they have to overuse the few they do
know -- stretch their meaning.-a And of course
"multiple" is vague and inexact to begin
with, so it covers a lack of knowledge.-a In
other words, like most overused words, it is
a sign of laziness.-a People who use it are lazy
writers and lazy thinkers.-a They also probably
think long words are more impressive than
short words, which is not the case".
-a-a-a-a-a-a -- from American Record Guide March/April 2026
That usage has become well established over the last few decades.
Resistance is futile.[1]
A few months ago, I posted the linguist Geoff Lindsey's take on it:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5DCQtz-RaE>
I'm not convinced by his argument that "multiple" fills a gap in the language, though. It seems to me that "more than one" (same number of syllables) does just fine in the examples he gives at 13:38:
[1] The Borg are of course well known for not being multiple.
Except "more than one" would not work for the current adopted motto of Luxembourg: "Multiplicity"
<https://www.vdl.lu/en/city/a-glance/multiplicity>
I agree it is a bit strained, but you get used to it after a few years.
I'm not convinced by his argument that "multiple" fills a gap in the language,
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 18:23:30 |
| Calls: | 810 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| D/L today: |
10 files (21,017K bytes) |
| Messages: | 193,781 |