BY SEGUN OMOLAYO
We must crave your indulgence to do more editions on usage and misusage. Remember, we have discovered that correct usage is the soul and spirit of any language, hence the need to drill down usage issues some more. The misusages highlighted in this edition will certainly interest you – perhaps because of how frequently they are committed. Such misusages should be discussed, lest they attain orthodoxy, particularly because of the stratospheric provenances of some of the errors. See the way the phrasal verb or idiom rest assured is misused, for example.
Rest assured
Strangely, many writers, particularly power writers, those who want to sound important and contemporary, seem to think that it is prestigious to write such outrage as: “You can be rest assured.” An international mediator wrote the following:
South Sudanese can be rest assured that President Salva Kiir will sign the IGAD compromise agreement today.
In its discussion of the misusage in the above specimen, “Pop” Errors, our writers guide, says: “Rest assured is actually an idiom derived from the verb rest, and its usage is completely different from the wrong application in this example. It is used formally “to emphasize that what you say is true or will definitely happen.” The book cites the dictionary illustration, which goes thus: “You may rest assured that we will do all we can to find him”. It enjoins us to “note that the phrasing be rest assured is absolutely un-English. It is as ridiculous as saying: be stand by; be stay put; be stand still; be stay calm; be remain quiet and such nonsense.” So, the correct usage of rest assured is:
South Sudanese can rest assured that President Salva Kiir will sign the IGAD compromise agreement today.
You would do well to understand the character of the phrase rest assured. It is a phrasal verb of the idiomatic type, and it must not be used as if it is an adjective, which it is not.
Result in
Often, you read result into and result to. None of these is correct usage, with due respect to those in rarefied echelons of bureaucracy and academics and other such realms who indulge in such wrong usage. Here is a sample:
There is the fear that the continuous attacks across the border may result into many people seeking refugee status.
The phrasal verb required in this construction is result in, NOT result into. ‘Betrayed in the above construction is unfamiliarity with the phrasal verb result in and its correct usage in varying contexts’ (“Pop” Errors). Citing OALD, it reveals further that “the usage is for something to result in something; and for something to result in somebody/something doing something.” Obviously, “it is in the latter sense that the writer has misapplied result into, a phrase which perhaps does not exist in the English language.” Correct usage is therefore as follows:
There is the fear that the continuous attacks across the border may result in many people seeking refugee status.
Round-off/Round-up
These nouns and their phrasal verb forms are mostly misused in broadcasting, where they have continued to use them interchangeably, and thereby betraying total disregard for the delicate nuances of usage. It is usually about ending the news bulletin. A news and current affairs director insisted that it was incorrect to end the news by saying: Here is a round-up of the major items of the bulletin. He and his news editor insisted that it had to be: Here is a round-off of the major items – even as the news editor was shown the dictionary meaning of round-up and its application, which incidentally was: Here is a round-up of the major items of the news. Their problem arose from total unfamiliarity with correct usage. They only understood round-up to mean arrest. They even claimed it was their house style, as if it is elegant to institutionalise errors as house style (That will be the day!) Yes, it can mean arrest in some contexts, as in a police round-up of criminals, but it is also correct to say a round-up of the min items of a news bulletin. Not so for these news chauvinists, who would forever write:
To end the news, here is a round-off of the main items.
It suffices to repeat here that round-off is wrong usage in this instance. A round-off of anything is the end of that thing. Does it then make sense to say “to end the news, here is an end of the main items” – even in the arcane world of TV and radio news writing? No, because that’s like ending the end! So, as already indicated earlier, round-up is the correct usage in this context. And let the news bigots note once and for all that a round-off is an end, and a round-up is a summary – even these days of a wrap on the news a la TVC and Channels TV. Meanwhile, for clarity, we stretch out correct usage thus:
To end the news, here is a round-up of the main items.
We might as well round off this discussion of the nouns round-off and round-up by conversing briefly on their verb forms – namely, round off and round up respectively. As phrasal verbs, to round off is to end something, and to round up is to summarise something (with regard to the specimen discussed).