Nib #17: Germanic words, Ja

One of the coolest things about the English language — granddaughter of both Latinate French and germanic Saxon — is that almost every word has a twin. The germanic word eat means the same thing as the latinate consume. Same with dog and canine or earth and terrain


The more of these pairs you read out loud, the more you’ll notice — the German words are usually better. 


They’re hardier, more fun to say and hear, more grounded and descriptive. Latinate words — with their French iambs and gentle sounds — often seem detached and antiseptic. Sometimes this is a good thing. Think how much easier it must be for doctors and patients to discuss the horrifying prospect of losing a limb in terms of amputation rather than lopping off.


But writers of English should want to use graphic, bracing, sticky words. As Will Strunk and E.B. White put it in The Elements of Style, “Anglo-Saxon is a livelier tongue than Latin, so use Anglo-Saxon words.”


I was reminded of this point when reading President Biden’s State of the Union Address last month. See how it ends:



“I believe in you the American people. You’re the reason I’ve never been more optimistic about our future! So let’s build that future together! Let’s remember who we are! We are the United States of America. There is nothing beyond our capacity when we act together! May God bless you all. May God protect our troops.”


Notice how the crescendoing peroration trips over that “capacity.” There’s nothing wrong with the word as such. But in this context, the ostentatiously Latinate “capacity” (just like that clunky “optimistic” four sentences earlier) stands out as robotic and wonky. It breaks the spell, like a car horn interrupting music.


The whole sentence — “There is nothing beyond our capacity when we act together!” — sounds like it was written by AI or translated from another language. The idea being communicated is good; it’s the word choice that’s awful. 


Biden should have said something like, “There’s nothing we can’t do when we do it together!” Or, “Together, ‘we the people of the UNITED States of America,’ can do anything!” 


The lesson for young writers: when in doubt, choose those rough-hewn, earthy germanic words over the smooth, antiseptic Latinate ones.


Until next week… keep writing!

April 25, 2025
Five quick tips for polishing your prose.
April 18, 2025
A good poem for Good Friday.
April 11, 2025
James Michael Curley's list of must-haves for public speakers (and speechwriters).
April 4, 2025
Two essays point to a generational opportunity for young writers.
March 28, 2025
Honest Abe was a great writer -- especially the one time he wasn't.
March 21, 2025
Not today, Satan.
March 14, 2025
The official Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s big speech before Congress last week offered the country not only a contrast of political visions, but of rhetorical strategies. Trump’s address was defined by — and indeed, succeeded on — the strength of its concrete details: specific programs cut, specific heroes lauded, specific private-sector investments announced (See Nib #61 ). Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin’s nationally televised speech immediately following Trump was, too. But not obviously. Most of the specific details of the speech were biographical, in the first 100 words. After that, Slotkin glazed over issues with airbrushed generalities: “We need to bring down the price of things we spend the most money on…” “… change doesn’t need to be chaotic or make us less safe…” “Today’s world is deeply interconnected…” “We are a nation of strivers.” The climax of Slotkin’s speech was almost a parody of homogenized political banalities. The two things we need to overcome today’s challenges, according to Slotkin and her speechwriters: “Engaged citizens and principled leaders.” Woof. On the other hand, Democrats know this poll-tested pap won’t move the needle. So what’s really going on here? The most likely answer is what boxers call the “rope-a-dope.” That is, Slotkin’s — and by extension her party’s — plan here is to put up perfunctory, superficial resistance to bait Trump into overreaching or punching himself out. This is what Muhammed Ali famously did to George Foreman in 1974.
March 7, 2025
Tuesday night's address was a speechwriting masterclass in the power of specific detail.
February 28, 2025
How to use, and not use, intensifiers.
February 21, 2025
Why an old-school writing exercise may be more valuable than ever.
More Posts