checking in on this it is interesting to me that the handful of examples people have — a handful weighed against hundreds of thousands of words of communication — are three to five years old and come from budget documents or t-shirts or people who aren’t even in office anymore
It's the same kind of outrage machine BS as the jeans ad. Except this time it's being foisted on us by conservatives who absolutely hate liberals but who hate trump more. They can't completely remove themselves from the rage baiting swamp they were raised in
Almost all of the "forbidden words" are ways of explicitly acknowledging and respecting people's differences. It's the ideas of respect and tolerance that are being attacked. Reinforcing the linguistic banishment of those values helps keep them out of the public imagination.
They really didn't like it when people said "woke" and sounded proud.
Can only imagine how they feel about “enlightened” the Renaissance. Yet, “Christians” are “born again” daily w & w/o water. Oy-veh. Praise the Lord & pass the ammunition.
Twitter exacerbates this, allowing pundits to pick out a random tweet from someone with 43 followers and claim it’s representative of half the country.
That's one of the propaganda artists' favorite tactics. Find an anecdote, present it in multiple venues as typical and worthy of outrage. Ensure the 'controversy' gets picked up by the 'mainstream media' and repeated until it's perceived as the truth by the public at large.
Timidity isn't attractive. People will much rather vote for someone who boldly says the "bad word" than for someone who means tests everything they say. As it turns out the Republicans can get away with saying slurs as long as they do it confidently...
Even if we do not say or write all of these words, some are useful and necessary. For example, patriarchy is an important word in this moment and should be used.
I once saw my Ivy League alumni magazine use the word "latinx". That's an indictment of all liberals and all of higher education.
I am just a small sample but spent my adult life in a university, spend too much time following politics. Probably agree not the best campaign rhetoric but I only hear about this language policing from Matt Y, Carville, Emanuel…rather than any campaign or any really life situation.
Yes they are all from around the time period when dems won elections
Whether it’s alienating or not, a bunch of kids changing homeless to unhoused is stupid and unproductive
Seems like there's a common, longstanding conception among Democratic consultants that there are Magic Words that, if found and used frequently, will attract swing voters. Or at least donor dollars. And the corollary is true too -- Magic Words that repel swing voters and we must thus expunge.
Two things can be true at once- it would very hard to find actual Dem politicians who used this language. At the same time, Dems and the progressive movement have been so obsessed with never offending anyone ever that they come across as spineless aliens. Sometimes you just have to be an asshole.
Assemble panels / groups of ~20 marginalized folks (autists, immigrants, trans, etc) & pitch to us, not pundit consultants. If we can’t visualize (systems thinking) how policy / legislation / funding / org change / etc proceed from pitch? Try again. We voters all want & need clear communications.
The one that echoes across the months for me was David Gergens saying on NPR that Democrats lost the election because their candidates kept telling white guys making $7.25 an hour that they were “privileged”. Yeah, that never happened.
If no politicians are actually using these words why are people so upset about other people telling them not to use them? Do you want politicians to start using these words? Do you think that will attract more votes? Or are you just upset about the straw man argument?
The discussion about whether Dem reps use or should avoid these terms is getting lost in the weeds. The terms are legit, refer to race and social issues, and the “Third Way” list is another case of people in power telling people who aren’t “Sit down and shut up.” Also: bsky.app/profile/jeff...
I don't think that I've ever seen anyone argue against "cultural appropriation", and I've been on liberal sites since 2004. I expect to see a "Blazing Saddles" reference every 2 or 3 days. We're just not that uptight or politically correct in general.
Every right wing bugaboo seems like a moral panic where the things they’re freaking out about are not happening at any scale or at all. But maybe I’ve listened to too many Michael Hobbes’ podcasts.
YEP! Especially the hateful rhetoric against trans folks — no science, no stats, no data, etc supporting “made up from whole cloth” and/or “blown entirely out of proportion” screeds! Literally less than 1% of US population — already at VERY HIGH RISK — being treated this way? It’s not OK, at *all*
I don’t recognize the name — would you please say more about the podcast? (Will also look for name on my pod app). TIA!
He did You’re Wrong About That for the first few years and currently does Maintenance Phase and If Books Could Kill.
Thank you! “If Books Could Kill” sounds pretty great :-) will check these out
Nichols is a Republican who believes that people pretend to enjoy Indian food. 100% unserious person not worth listening to.
We can boil down all those terms as very polite, academic ways of saying “don’t be an asshole”
Yeah, the alternative to heteronormative is bigoted. We can go with that.
The whole thing is dumb but I can't believe a simple and self-explanatory phrase like "food insecurity" is on that list.
I remember an analysis of Harris' campaign speeches. The conclusion was she was almost entirely focused on bedrock issues like the economy and the middle class. Yet, according to MAGA, she would constantly harp on about Trans Rights. The Right will always follow their predetermined narrative.
I've seen this in Canada as well. Standard IDU tactic: always force the "enemy" into your pre-determined narrative.
The reason they say she harped on Trans issues is cause the fucking “Kamala is for they/them” ads played every damn day. Sure, she might’ve been saying other stuff in her speeches, but they weren’t looking up her speeches.
These things are only said on college campuses, but the right assumes that is what Democrats say too
? Terms like “unhoused” and “food insecurity” are used routinely in local and regional community support — government, charity, healthcare, public safety, affinity orgs, neighbors — these are phrases which support clear concise communication AND respect everyone delivering & receiving support.
You’re right. But it’s also two out of a list of 15. I was speaking generally as someone who has worked inside and outside of higher education
Nodding — I’m in public & private sector spaces, hear these phrases (the full slide) in both.
Almost like someone is building a giant straw man so they can win na argument for no other reason than just winning the argument.
i feel like the evidentiary standard is closer to "I can imagine a 19-year-old barista somewhere choosing to say this"
which is to ask, what is the standard by which we conclude democrats no longer use this language, if actual evidence of its rarity doesn’t count? if the standard is “republicans no longer accuse them of it,” then you’re just illustrating the basic problem with this discourse
They want capitulation on the underlying social issues, by which they actually mean they want to roll back culture and society and are threatening to (re-)join the Republican coalition of it doesn't happen. Which it won't.
my take: the standard these ppl use is ~common knowledge~, ie, "everyone is saying this"(ie "the media I watch/listen to is saying this"), which isn't actl something the Dems -or anyone but that person!- has any power over. The real solution here is Nichols needs to stop watching Fox News.
I still don't understand what's wrong with talking this way
Apparently it’s all about classism but instead of working on that we (citizens who don’t make policy) need to stop saying big college-level words like “patriarchy” b/c it makes voters feel dumb. (Real time: it makes certain voters feel attacked no matter how many caveats you use to carve them out)
Tom is a moron. I hope that's lowbrow enough for him.
it's clear to me that Third Way's problem isn't "using words that make the speaker come across/ mildly annoying", it's that they're all related to real social issues that are life and death for lots and lots of people.
so it's less that the Third Ways out there are encouraging people to write and speak in a manner that isn't "cringe", more that they just don't want to hear about this stuff, period.
It's like crime - it cannot possibly ever be absolute zero so therefore it must be EVERYWHERE! like the mathematical concept that zero equals infinity.
The words aren't the problem, it's the ideas they convey. The GOP hasn't wanted to discuss civil rights since the Palmer Raids.
*i* think that the issue isn’t the words, it is the substantive positions. no amount of language self policing will satisfy someone who just disagrees with, say, legal protection from gender discrimination
Totally agree. Mouthing the platitudes but not actually taking that stand with people who are continually getting marginalized just make it the empty gesture it really is. We, the voters, are looking for actual leadership and a way to move forward and find current Democratic leadership lacking.
Ding fucking ding
We have asked them to be considerate of others and they have thrown a giant temper tantrum because they just don’t want to. They have been asked to care and the thought of it is so distressing to them they’ve chosen fascism.
The words just amplify a bigger concept of leftist moral puritanism. A person can align strongly on 9 out of 10 left-wing issues but have reservations or concerns about the 10th issue and the left will bar that person from their movement. It's the allornothingness that the language enforces.
Yes, because we don’t throw entire of communities under the bus.
What I can say for sure: since 2020, the more distance Democrats have put between themselves and "Defund the Police," the worse they have done in elections.
Meanwhile when they did shit like this it was criticized *from the left*
Wasn’t that criticized from all angles? It seemed hollow, performative, and pretty irrelevant. The way to stand with protests was… to join the protests.
100 percent. “Patriarchy” is on there. Also “cisgender” and “intersectionality.” Those are important concepts that you can’t discuss easily without using the words themselves, which I agree is the point.
You should really stop giving Tom Nichols so much headspace. He's out there shoving the Overton Window as hard as possible to the right. I'm not even sure he realizes he's doing it.
Oh he's very much aware. He's a lifelong Republican who's main issue with Trump is he's too loud about what he's doing.
I agree it’s the positions. Republicans use those words as a straw man to bait Democrats into talking about DEI, etc. rather than R’s very unpopular policies on taxes, healthcare, education, civil rights, drugs, the list goes on. Imagine being bashed on Trans sports by dildo throwers!
'republicans cant win on the merits so to keep things fair (to sell stories in the newspaper) we have to let them do whatever they want' has been the journalistic standard since the birther movement started and it gets harder to go back every day
Also "These progressives are the problem with their pee cee and policing language so here's a list of words I want prohibited" is pretty funny on the face of it. People complain. Left, right, center. A triumph of RW propaganda was convincing so many that it only comes from the left.
Just noticed "critical theory" on there and like... There is one party that kept endlessly spouting the words "critical race theory". Does anyone remember which party that was?
You don’t remember Harris’s election eve speech on critical theory and its impact on trigger warnings, safe spaces, and heteronormativity??????? /s
I have no idea how much words matter, but I suspect they matter more than policy positions. Voters are notoriously fickle about the latter and are willing to tolerate a lot from someone who they like the sound of.
🎯
Nailed it!
It’s like “woke.” How do you stop being attacked for “woke” when it’s just shorthand for anything your opponent doesn’t like? And they attack you for it whether you actually say the word or not? I’d love to make these people define “woke” when they throw it around, because I guarantee they can’t.
People are just looking for an acceptable excuse to vote how they wanted to anyway.
Your newsletter today referencing Jesse Jackson’s quilt was the best thing I’ve read on Dem messaging in a long time.
Maybe we need to quit listening to conservatives who at this time do not have a political party because they played footsie with xenophobes to win elections, only to have those xenophobes take over the party and cast them aside.
True.
The issue is an as always been this: White ppl think we owe them many duties, and among those is our duty to NEVER make them uncomfortable in any way. If they experience discomfort, and of course we have had something to do w/this, they can do whatever they want to us. What did Noem do to that dog🤔?
This issue is as as it has always been…”-oops
It's no less sympathetic of homelessness to say homeless. Unhoused is enforced language across the entire sector working on the issue.
Plus, it's not a if the Southern Baptist Convention cement Patriarchy into the pastoral aurhority. bsky.app/profile/catm...
Sure seems like it. They just don’t want to look evil by saying what they mean.
At best nutpicking. But really, it's the language-policing of an abuser. You can't say anything to set off Drunk Daddy. The closest thing to an apology from Drunk Daddy after his violent outburst being "Look what you made me do!" rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpick...
I think you are under appreciating how much people see those words in HR emails, training sessions, CBT’s, etc throughout the year at large companies at least. And people associate that with Dems. That for my tiny circle at least is where this whole connection is made, unfair or not.
Maybe the solution to that is not going along with pretending that it’s Dems doing it and not out of touch corporate suits.
No one looks back at the Southern Strategy and thinks it was vocabulary choices that made the parties flip.
Yes, exactly—it’s why they never propose alternative words and rationales, bc they want less focus on those issues altogether.
Exactly. If someone said “hey, this term specifically is inaccurate/offensive/a problem for xyz reasons, can we say [term] instead” that’s a conversation that might be worth having. But when they just stomp their feet like “stop talking about privilege!” it’s plainly not really about the *word*.
Or patriarchy!! 😳
Ironically, I have actually seen a good argument for replacing “patriarchy” with “kyriachy”, because the authoritarian structure underlying society isn’t only “men on top” and it’s reductive to use a term that suggests that’s the core of the problem.
But that’s… not the argument being made by people yelling at Dems to stop talking about it. They’d hate “kyriarchy” even more bc it’s explicitly intersectional and acknowledges that race, gender, sexuality, etc all play a role in supremacist ideologies.
Idk what that word means, but agree they would hate it!
Basically it means the complex hierarchy created by the intersection of a bunch of axes of privilege. Bc it’s not just “men” at the top, it’s rich old cishet white men.
In more detail at Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy
Yes, this. Third Way isn’t saying “use ‘kidnapping’ instead of ‘involuntary confinement’.” They’re saying “don’t talk about ICE kidnapping people.”
Bingo
The classic but neglected refrain, "republicans have agency and truly disagree with your worldview."
And that’s the thing. The question is never “what could others do to mollify the right wing?” The question is always “why am I such a credulous bitch that I keep forgetting the right never acts in good faith and their complaints should be disregarded completely?”
This should be a bumper sticker.
This is why it's such a perfect trap. By getting people to frantically deny using language designed to acknowledge that you care about marginalized groups, you effectively get people to stop talking about those groups and therefore marginalize them further.
dems also want social benefits to survive and be improved (made cheaper in some cases!) — i feel like this belief gets lost and they are accused of being spendthrifts
Some people just need a safe space from words like patriarchy or privilege or microaggression or heteronormative or LGBTQIA+ so they don't get triggered
Exactly!!! The issue isn't saying "people with a uterus" it's the idea that uterus =/= woman. Saying "cultural appropriation" acknowledges privilege and the genocidal history of Europeans around the world.
I say this as a cis woman who is not a "person who menstruates" or a "person with a uterus and ovaries"
Nutpicking. They'll find some new words spoken by someone somewhere and pretend the WHOLE Democratic Party is obsessed with that word. Over and over and over, while the Dems have a puzzled WTF look on their faces.
Yeah, the thing is, if someone says something with words that seem weird to you but where you recognize & acknowledge the underlying correctness, you shouldn't become negatively polarized against the thing.
To whatever extent it were dumb to say "unhoused" instead of "homeless", perhaps we could have that conversation after all the housing had been built
i feel the problem isn’t the words—it’s the instinct to police how others speak. that positions someone as an expert prescribing the “correct” language instead of inviting dialogue. worried about turning off voters? ignore this language, and you’ll silence the problems they describe.
just another example of "regardless of any merit your position may have, I find you very annoying, so...no."
Democrats must be defined be what the Republicans claim they are and Republicans must be defined by what the Republicans claim they are. That’s just balanced journalism.
A problem that will never go away, imho, so long as Fox News rules the roost.
We need the linguist historical experts to "weigh in" waywordradio.org (okay-what is the historical background of the term "weigh in"🤣? This is actually a nerdy and very fun show).
yup. But doesn't that show that the "very serious people" on the center left are just easy marks for the GOP?
Republicans were arguing that Democrats were the party of slavery on Fox like last month….so maybe 100 years from now?
Or perhaps flood the media space with the vernacular, and aggressively so. Reclaim plain language, as visibly as possible. And extend this to the ivory tower, as much as possible.
why must scholars comport themselves as if they are politicians?
Yes, and likewise: Why should a budget document be phrased as if it were a political manifesto?
...and yes, student impressions, of either elitism or down-to-earth-ness, can vary based on the language a professor chooses to use. That impression can disseminate, either helpfully or unhelpfully.
Pure researchers, perhaps don'tworry about it. Classroom instructors-- the points of contact with the general public--yes, should. Because the impression they give to their students bleeds out to peers and parents etc. I'm quite far left, but spent 20 years teaching at a red-state U and a CC....
gl twisting yourself in pretzels but the RW would rather stop speaking English than to acknowledge and discuss these concepts
I don't know the pretzels to which you refer, but it's fairly simple to imtroduce a classroom to the concepts of, e.g., food insecurity and the unhoused by using the plain language of hunger and homelessness. You bring students into the conversation that way. Ain't rocket science.
your post has been flagged for the use of unauthorized language. please stay put and a censor will bring you to a reeducation facility shortly
“everyone should behave as if they are representatives of a political party to which they may or may not believe” is a leninist demand for conformity. it is not compatible with a free society!
Jamelle, that's a strawman.
Some of the terms in the Third Way report *are* plain language, they're just plain language about ideas and people Third Way doesn't want to hear about or from.
Okay. I don't really know much about the "Third Way." I'll take your word for it.
Third Way is a centrist Democratic think tank, detractors frequently describe it as 'neoliberal'. They always have the same advice: tack to the center and use language that appeals to "both sides". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_W...
It’s GOP-voting parents hearing their kids use these words when they come home from college that riles them up. Pissy parents want to rewind the clock to before their kids started developing their own identities, and they think GOPers will make it happen thru literal and figurative force
Democrats aren’t losing elections bc they use woke language. Critics are purposefully missing the real reason why they’re losing. Democrats are losing elections bc white voters are rejecting their diverse coalition & governance by that coalition. It’s the backlash to the 1st black president.
Critics of the Democratic Party like Tom Nichols & Third Way do not want to admit the role race has played in white voters moving away from the Democratic Party. But the Trump administration demonstrates on a daily basis just how much of a role race has played in the choices white voters have made.
Especially as the ruling party is fueled by young staffers who talk like they spend way too much time reading books with titles like “Sea Knights for Christ: How the Battle of Lepanto Saved the West from the Dusky Hordes”
This feels so much like Lucy and the football, except they're ripping away the football while simultaneously moving the goal post.
Why is it that Democrats get into political trouble when we try to follow the Golden Rule of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” as well as the Platinum Rule “Do unto others as they would want done unto them"?
This is much like the accusation that Harris talked about trans people all the time, when the reality is that only Republican attack ads did so. Far too many people on the left and center internalize Republican talking points, and so mistake them for reality.
Maybe Republicans should stop using triggering words like “entitlements” and “meritocracy” and “heritage” and “western values” and “assimilate” and “able bodied”….
THANK YOU for such wonderful examples for me to riff with — as a DISABLED person 😁 I particularly appreciate your nod to our varied demographic — each & every one of us will be disabled in our lives and ALL of us benefit from learning more about each other & connection / support along our journey
And, I 💯 agree with de-neo-liberal-izing jargon like “meritocracy” (wealth at birth predicts wealth during life, not “bootstraps”), decolonizing European settler mono-culture & identity-dissolving “melting pot” for CELEBRATION of our inclusive “heritageS” & “COMMUNITY values” which “enrich / join”
Or, we voters + electeds make a point of defining terms? We have rights to our “ENTITLEMENTS” (very fiscal / legal NOUN conflated with pejorative ADJECTIVE assigned to behavior). Ex: We have RIGHT to claim Social Security benefits we are ENTITLED to by our paycheck contributions, disability, etc
Also, those words are useful and good. I can think of many words republicans genuinely SHOULD stop using. Again- to the media, the Right has no agency or responsibility, and the Left must be perfect paragons according to self-contradictory criteria.
Absolutely agree that these terms are useful and good! Banning phrases we use in our local govt & communities is blowing my mind — what triple-speak consultantese could possibly better convey the broadness, complexity, and localized specificity of “food insecurity”? Stop the intentional obfuscation
Right? Nazis saying words are bad does not make them bad. Since this seems to be a year in which we need to say obvious things.
Worth stating!! We are all bombarded & drenched in too many things to keep track of (by design), and reminders of basic truths help keep us grounded, IMHO. Thx!
*Clarity* in communication is what is necessary — not *consultant-speak* which is effectively archetypal “politicians’ double-speak” intended to “soften difficult topics” but actually obscures any principled stance / position / approach which may lurk under the muddled rhetoric. It’s weak language.
What word should replace “privilege” which appeared first on the list? I use that word a lot.
Its choice people decide to be offended.
Living in a blue state and visit family often in a red state, I can easily confirm that these kinds of buzzwords are far more prevalent in “red circles” than blue ones.
I can’t imagine feeling more put off by this stuff than by, I don’t know, every evil and insane thing that comes out of Trump’s mouth?
Or his actual actions that mirror the evil things he says
We’re living through a moment of historical tragedies repeated as farce because we’re dealing with a generation of bigots who find bigotry uncouth. So we get transphobes who claim to be the true gender egalitarians. Racists who claim the true racism is dogmatic egalitarianism.
They simply demand the cake they just ate and won’t stop pounding the table until it is rightfully returned to them.
Nichols is all over the map when it comes to takes. Gotta adapt to keep those cable news hits going.
Tom gives me "Agrees we Chris Rufo" vibes
I recently went back and finished grad school last year and one of my favorite History professors was a non-binary person with an expertise in East Africa. I never heard any of these words in that class. From them or the other students. It’s nothing more than a stupid red-herring argument.
Now, when I worked at a different non-profit than I do now during early COVID, one ran by upper middle class white women and whose donors were primarily very rich white NYers, they used these words ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
People who voted for Trump knew who he was - racist, rapist, fraud, coup leader - and voted for him anyway, because they wanted that. Dems went maybe TOO centrist, and it didn't help, because enough voters wanted someone to hurt other people. We need to grapple with THAT, not fucking WORDS.
Someone in my FFXIV discord server was saying, "Democrats hate is why they lost" after the election. I asked which Dems. He said, "Jimmy Kimmel." Apparently making fun of hypocrisy and people actively hating on immigrants, POC, and LGBTQ+ is hate to a fucking idiot.
Blaming some words is more comfortable than investigating the real roots of their resentment. It’s the “intellectual” version of “they’re putting litter boxes in school bathrooms.”
Lgbtqia+ being in the memo of frowned upon terms is shocking because it basically demands that lgbtqia+ folks drop the name that the community itself came up with that's commonly used in popular culture.
Reminds me of the “I can’t say Merry Christmas” anymore crowd. Yeah, you can. No one is going to flay you for saying it.
Right?? Difference now is you will hear OTHER holidays & INCLUSIVE phrases like “Happy Holidays” or “winter season.” Corollary to “accountability feels like punishment if one’s never experienced it”? Perhaps: “Diversity feels like erasure if one’s culture has been forcibly dominant over others”?
But I can't force you to say "Merry Christmas," which is what I really want.
I feel like this is classic politics of "are you done beating your wife?" Just make shit up about your opponents and--right or wrong--it sticks and the D's are on the defensive and have to respond. One way to fix this is communicating a positive message in a creative way *cough*Mamdani*cough*
Absolutely agree! I love the approach Mandami’s campaign is taking — the mudslinging is so …last century. I like seeing immediate pushback (Ms Crockett comes to mind) and/or quick acknowledgement of hearing the mudslinger with refocus on topic / goal which mudslinger was trying to distract / disrupt
Let's not forget that Christopher Rufo engaged in a very successful campaign to link "critical race theory" with very negative connotations. He bragged about it in 2021 (and is now a trustee at a public college in Florida.)
Here is the research on the usage of the "words":
Rightwing media thrives on fueling resentment and outrage toward the left. Even if the focus on language fades, it will pivot to new cultural battlegrounds—criticizing what liberals eat, wear, buy, or where they’re seen. The goal remains the same: to frame them as un-American and out of touch.
This is the reason I stopped watching Bill Maher. He criticized Ds for being too woke, but his only examples were some unnamed people on Twitter. Meanwhile, elected Rs en masse were canceling people right and left.
is this a bot acct? weren't you just talking abt the need for democrats to speak in plain language? do you not see how this connects?
Bad faith assholes stoke culture war divisiveness by mischaracterizing “The Left” as primarily focused on pedantic word game nonsense. People like Tom normalize and give credit to these efforts by giving it any credence. No, calling the homeless “unhoused” is not among the biggest problems we face
Tom uses it as rage bait when he's bored.
Another example of white guy in a position of influence whose morals and ability to think critically have been atrophied by privilege. He speaks from the perspective of someone peering through a keyhole, rather than the observer who opens the door and steps into the room.
Yeah, he had made some comments in the past that make it seem like he's knowingly trolling a bit on stuff like this. Conservative thinkers have engaged in this kind of nonsense for decades, shoring up the extremism on the right. I don't think he knows how to not do it even when opposing Trump.
Just like the don't really know how to seriously consider the issues the 'objectionable' words are about.
I think the larger lesson is less about the words specifically and how we talk to others about issues that matter to us. Less academic jargon, smaller words, less personal attacks and characterization. Fewer you statements, more I statements.
I also want clear descriptions of what OBSTACLES are known when campaign promises are made — “forgiving student debt” is a fantastic idea! What’s in the way? Who else needs to be on board to make it happen? How can we voters create & share our requests to our electeds, together? Let’s take the mic
IMnsHO jargon / specialized terms necessary, as connects our “plain spoken” into archaic / legal / fiscal language used in govt — effective communicators (Schiff iirc?) include “lay terms” AND “terms of art,” teaching with our dailys term + formal govt term. WE NEED multilingual glossary w/ examples