It's held up as an example where your use of language, whose purpose should always be to be understood by others, shows an explicit or implicit contempt for your listener.
The vendors of PC Matic, a product aimed at the computer unsavvy, run TV adverts in which they mention a "single pane of glass" as a feature. I had to look up what it meant: apparently it's a buzzword for integrating information from multiple data sources into one window. No one likely to buy PC Matic is going to know that. Then again, given PC Matic's sterling reputation, maybe they do hold their customers in contempt...
"We're working to implement the number of bus rides from A to B".
It's fun because you can clearly see the mechanism in action: the person who wrote the sentence decided to replace the too understandable verb "to increment" with something so obscure he himself didn't know what it really means.
"Attendere, validazione in corso."
[english]Wait, validation is under way.[/english]
Soon followed, as soon as the leds become green, by a (much higher pitch and happy sounding) different (still female) voice:
"Ritirare la tessera"
[english]Pick up the card[/english]
"Validazione" is not a word used by anyone outside some specific tech sectors or bureaucrats, a number of people would be perplexed about its meaning.
I guess in English is the same, would you use "Wait, validation is under way" or "Wait, reading the card" or "Wait, checking the card info".
There is an old (by now noone notices it but it was a thing when it was introduced) precedent with the verb "obliterare" which noone knew at the time it was introduced on buses.
A sign "E' obbligatorio procedere all'obliterazione del biglietto" is (was) something that noone could understand.
[english]It is compulsory to proceed to the obliteration of the ticket[/english]
Obliterare is a perfectly valid verb, but it means - literally - to cancel a writing by drawing a line over it, and it was used only by academics and people of letters, while by extension it has a more common meaning of completely destroy/delete something/someone (from existence or from memory), etc.
At a given time it was "invented" to mean "insert the ticket into the machine so that it will be timestamped (or only stamped) and/or punched or have a corner cut in such a way that it won't be re-usable".
The same meaning of "to obliterate" for "to stamp" or " to punch" a ticket is in English as well, I believe.
And "the machine" was called "obliteratrice" of course.
Part 3: http://www.the-tls.co.uk/english-as-she-isnt-spoke-part-3/
Part 2: http://timescolumns.typepad.com/stothard/2015/04/english-as-...
Part 1: http://timescolumns.typepad.com/stothard/2013/03/english-as-...
> you may hear that your train was “originally due to depart from Platform 4”, but “will now depart from Platform 6”. What’s “originally” doing there?
Surely 'originally' is serving exactly the purpose it claims to serve, of describing the state of affairs before the alteration? What would be a better word?
If the suggested alternative is to omit the description of the 'original' entirely: though I'm not much experienced with the London Underground, I know that, on the Amtrak, if I paid attention to every announcement I would go mad, so I have a subconscious routine that perks up conscious attention only when it detects something that seems likely to me. If I am waiting at Platform 4, I probably won't notice a random, unprefaced announcement about Platform 6; but I am much more likely to notice it if it points out that those of us at Platform 4 should be paying attention to it.
Does it mean that the service only has four coaches and that each seat has already been pre-booked? (That is to say, good luck, you'll probably be standing.)
Any other possible meaning I'm having a hard time divining.