Thursday 17 March 2011

exploitation - utilisation


The problem here is a fairly common one – legitimate words that are mostly used correctly, but that have negative connotations which make them either easily misinterpreted or that make the sentence they sits in sound weird and inappropriate. This is most clear in (1) and (2). You can imagine some comic villain at UMP with a black top-hat, twirling a long black moustache around his finger as he writes it, cackling away insanely. In the Warsaw example, it sounds more like a confession than anything else. Have a look:

Common Usage
1)  Warsaw is one of the biggest beneficiaries when it comes to exploitation of European Union funds.
2)  Come and join us in Poznań, where our exploitation of national and European resources is reasonable and effective.
 3) Exploitation of local labour sources is recommended.


Better Usage
1)  Warsaw is one of the biggest beneficiaries when it comes to utilisation of European Union funds.
2)  Come and join us in Poznań, where we know how to reasonably and effectively exploit the resources of national and European institutions.
 3) Use of local labour sources is recommended.


OED Definition
1- (mass noun) the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work,
2- (v) making use of a situation to gain an unfair advantage for oneself    
3- (v) the action of making use of and benefiting from resources   


Fixit-shmixit
So, what are the fixes? Luckily, there’s a really, really cool synonym – utilisation (1). This has the same meaning and sense as definition 3 of exploitation, without any of the extra heavy baggage from definitions 1 and 2. The verb form, utilise, should also be noted.     

As it does, context has an effect on the gravity the exploitation in your document. (2) demonstrates how a tiny bit of judicious rephrasing allows us to keep our exploitation intact, but clearly give it the productive sense of definition three.  Makes it sound less of a crime, and more like they know what they’re doing.           

(3) is a nice, simple fix, and also a prime example of how we don’t always need to use our best, multi-syllabic bombs to blow up the chicken shed.

No comments:

Post a Comment