Advertisement

A Word, Please: Time to press flush on this grammar error

February 21, 2014|By June Casagrande

Regular readers of this column know that I spend a lot of time talking about grammar wrongs that aren’t — the countless mythical language no-nos that get passed down from generation to generation of people who never bother to look them up.

Broken-record metaphors apply: I replay ad nauseam the same scratchy refrain: “People think it’s an error to [insert grammar myth here], but it’s not.”

So, for a change of pace, I thought I’d talk about a popular usage that some people call wrong and (here’s the twist) it really is wrong — an error I can’t defend with all the grammar apologist powers at my disposal.

It’s the term “flush out” used in place of “flesh out.” Unlike the grammar “errors” that you’d put in quotation marks, this actually is an error. Here’s how it goes down.

Imagine a writer is talking about a partially conceived project: He has an outline for a story, but no story yet, and he says: “I really need to flush out the plot and characters.” Or imagine an office manager talking about a meeting or get-together being planned and saying, “We have the location and the theme, but we still need to flush out all the details.” Not good.

Advertisement

For any usage that means to fill out, round out or complete, you want “flesh out.” I’ll let Garner’s Modern American Usage explain why: “To flesh out is to put flesh on bare bones — that is, to move beyond the merest rudiments and to elaborate; to add some nuance and detail. To flush out, probably a hunting metaphor, is to bring something into the open light for examination.”

So if you have a rough outline for a story, you need to flesh out your plot and characters. If you have a basic plan for a party, you need to flesh out the details. No flushing required.

Of course, you can’t condemn a common figure of speech based on the opinion of a single source. So I checked others.

Glendale News-Press Articles Glendale News-Press Articles
|
|
|