I like lists.

Whenever I take those personality tests, I come out as a confirmed list-maker. I think it gives me the illusion that I have some level of control over my life.

Plus, there’s something so satisfying about crossing off an item on my list. It’s over. Done. Time to move on.

I hesitate to admit this, but I’m even one of those people who will add items I’ve already completed to a list just so I can cross them off.

Lately, I’ve seen lots of posts and articles and heard lots of conversations about words that annoy people. Maybe they’re over-used. Maybe they show the user is trying too hard. Maybe they’re words that break commonly held beliefs about proper language use (turning a noun or adjective into a verb, for example). Maybe they’re just … really stupid.

Lake Superior State University in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, even puts out an annual list of words it thinks should be banished. The 2010 list includes nods to pop culture (“chillaxin’”) politics (“stimulus”) and corporate life (“transparency” and “shovel-ready”).

My personal list of words that should be banished includes:

  • Synergy – If people are really trying to sound impressive, they say “synergistic.”
  • Utilize – Try “use” instead.
  • Key – It’s fine as a noun, but adds no value as an adjective.
  • Strategic – Sounds important, but is it really necessary?
  • Within – “In” almost always works instead.
  • Prior to – “Before” is much more conversational.
  • Disconnect – OK if you’re discussing electricity, plumbing or computers. Not OK if you’re talking about ideas as in, “I sense a disconnect here.”

Please note that I’m talking about an ideal society. I know many of these words won’t go away. I edit articles every day that contain lots of these words. I try to reduce their use, but sometimes they’re still in the final copy. And I can live with that.

So here’s YOUR chance. What words would you be happy never to see in a manuscript or hear in conversation again?