The one that’s doing my head in is people using “inbox” as a verb. I often wonder if they ask their postman to “hallway floor behind the front door” them their letters.
1 Like
I think we need Entomology Man in this thread.
Frauded upsets me.
3 Likes
I see what you did there. 
2 Likes
Or the stupid American phrase “reach out”. No we don’t “reach out” in the UK.
3 Likes
This just seems to me like a classic oversimplification which actually makes the wording more complicated. Somebody thought about “defrauded” and decided it was an odd/complicated word, so they tried to make it simpler and say “frauded”. Except it now makes no sense.
I brought this up previously in relation to Monzo’s language guidance and said a potentially-complicated, yet industry-standard or usual accepted term, may be more desirable and clear than a more general, ambiguous, non-standard, but superficially “simpler” term.
At the time, a lot of people disagreed with me and said that simpler was always better. Rather patronisingly, I thought, when they had missed my point - and then someone from Monzo came along to the thread and posted that they had people who would look into these sorts of circumstances before signing off copy and the sort of situation I was describing wouldn’t happen.
Well, now it has in this case!
TL; DR my opinion is that, if they don’t want to use defrauded, they should frame the sentence using the phrase “victim of fraud”.
3 Likes
Pardon me, but I think you… …
damn!
(Where’s my coat…)
1 Like
This makes my brain hurt. 
Here’s a gear-grinder - “My Bad !”
I mean… 
- come on !!!
2 Likes
English is very much a codified language.
It may not have an “official” body which oversees the language as French does with Académie Française, but that doesn’t stop it being codified. In fact English is one of the most codified languages in the world.
As soon as Caxton introduced the printing press in 1476 it began the process of codification and standardisation of the language. It’s generally agreed by linguists that the key point in codification was Samuel Johnson’s 1755 dictionary.
The Oxford English Dictionary is considered by the majority to be the definitive codification body for Standard U.K. English and Merriam Webster for Standard US English.
As for the french, the actions of Académie Française have very little impact on the actual language with change occurring regardless of what rules they put into place. Language change and codification is an organic process driven by multiple factors, which most linguists would argue is driven by a descriptivist approach. The French approach is very much prescriptivist and is a minority view and seen as ineffective. Telling people which words they can and can’t use simply doesn’t work.
The fact that we teach English as a language in schools to a set of grammar rules and spelling rules shows that the language has gone through a process of codification. Without it wouldn’t be possible to teach a standard English.
By the very nature of having a standard “version” of a language it must have undergone a process of codification!
There’s definitely no such thing as a “simple fact” when it comes to language and language change.
Source: my degrees is English Language and Linguistics and I used to teach English Language to A-Level as well as being a senior examiner for AQA on their English Language B spec 
12 Likes
The simple fact is that it’s the matter of recognising an authority. Just because there’s an academy in France, doesn’t mean people will follow it. To some people it’s as much of a claim as Oxford Dictionary.
2 Likes
So reading between the lines: The Official Linguist of Monzo says Frauded isn’t a word.
3 Likes
It’s fair to say there’s been some internal debate about the use of frauded 
12 Likes
Translation:
5 Likes
I had a strange obsession with obscure words as a child. Tenebrous was a favourite of mine throughout high school, and I would often find a way to sneak it into essays to see if it would fool my teachers. Not a single one of them over the years believed it to be a real world, and thought I’d made it up. This became a bit of a running gag throughout high school until my teacher in year 10 was so adamant it wasn’t real she thought my dictionary was wrong too.
I was eventually advised to stop using it, especially in an exam, because if they were unaware it’s a real word, it’s likely the examiner wouldn’t know either, and could cost me marks.
Haven’t used the word in a sentence since, until now.
2 Likes
I’m not sure you can say you’ve used it in a sentence here yet. At least a sentence which shows the context.
And I’m (a) now kind of curious and (b) not googling it
2 Likes
When I did A-Level sociology our teacher told us if we couldn’t remember a theorist/theory to support our answers just to make a name up because it was impossible for an examiner to know them all 
7 Likes
Quite often I would use my surname, a teacher’s surname or a friend’s surname to cite something when the actual name escaped me. It never did me any harm in my A-Levels.
I never marked anybody down for it when I was an examiner either - as long as the idea and theory was sound I didn’t see failure to recall a name as a problem!
It’s part of the flaw with the exam system anyway, the world as it is now we just Google something if we’re not sure! The real world and the way we test are even further removed from each other!
2 Likes
Unless we are in a Four Tops tribute act.
7 Likes
Go and listen to some real French!
And don’t get me started on verlan or (to the absolute horror of l’academie* when they hear English loan words. Last time I looked, everyone says “un email” but the Academy made up the word “courriel” - just because. Or that time they wanted to change the spelling of “le weekend” to “le ouiquend”. Basically there’s loads of stuff that everyone recognises as French, might even be in some dictionaries, but ‘The Authority’ declines to recognise.
But more to the point, I don’t really care whether “frauded” is a “real word” or not** - but it’s not in common use. I’d suggest that using it is contrary to the Monzo tone of voice because it actually hinders communication, rather than helps it. I’d turn the sentence into plain English and say:
You won’t get any free card deliveries unless your card has been stolen, it has expired or you’re a victim of fraud.
I’m gonna lob a grenade in and invoke @hashbridge. I stand ready to argue. 
*There’s actually an accent in there, but I’m leaving it off it to spite them.
**It’s not.
5 Likes