Natch Watch: PRWeek strikes again
Posted on April 11th, 2007 by Mike Keliher
Shortened permalink:
Shortened permalink:
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
I hate when people say or write “natch.” It’s unnatural (pun-sort-of-thing intended) and ugly, and just because it’s in the dictionary doesn’t mean it’s a word. PRWeek’s blog has used this “word” before, and they’ve struck again today.
I like the PRWeek blog, but I don’t like this hideous “natch” thing. I actually feel moved to rant about whenever I see it. Thanks for allowing my arrogant, high-horse indulgence.
Related items
Mike,
Appreciate the link, and you’re right, natch is not a pretty thing.
Two things - one, I’d like to point out we’re natch free on PRWeek.com proper since 2001 http://www.prweek.com/us/search/?lstJournalCodes=PRS&fuseaction=PRS.Search.Results&sSearchPhrase=natch
and two, a minor tweak, by a dictionary’s very definition, isn’t any item that is located in one a word?
Anyways, keep reading.
Respectfully,
Keith
I’m just poking fun. I really do like the PRWeek blog, but unfortunately, I also really dislike “natch.” Call me a prick, but it just bugs me.
As far as the dictionary thing: What are your thoughts on “ain’t”?
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=ain‘t
It’s in the dictionary, but as any little kid will tell you, “ain’t ain’t a word.”
Valid point. I too was poking fun. We know now what awaits us if we resort to natch!
Best, K.