A ‘slip of the tongue’ is one way we refer to an error in our speech, but a ‘slip of the ear’ can catch us out as well.

Directors or executives who have spent long hours in board meetings over many years are likely to recall numerous incidents where a speaker used the wrong word. The word used was similar to the correct one but had an entirely different meaning.

A Memorable Slip

Those of us who heard Australian PM Tony Abbott’s slip of the tongue in 2013 won’t easily forget it – “No one, however smart, however well-educated, however experienced, is the suppository of all wisdom.”

He meant ‘repository’ of course, but once said, his gravitas was damaged. While he might have intended to use a ‘tongue in cheek’ phrase (perhaps wishing to play down his Rhodes Scholar status), it seems more likely that a crossed neural wire caused the incorrect substitution.

Mea culpa

None of us is immune from language slips. My own most recent instance of a crossed neural wire involved texting the sentence ‘This doesn’t auger well’, to a contact. Shortly afterward I cringed as I realised that I had referred to a drill bit rather than a portent (augur). While this is not an eggcorn, mondegreen, or malapropism (see header image above), it is an example of conveying a different meaning than the one intended.

I’d love to blame autocorrect or ‘fat fingers’, but ‘e’ and ‘u’ are 5 keys apart on my laptop keyboard. I might have gotten away with it if I had spoken to my contact, as the two words are homonyms – they sound the same. My slip of the keyboard (or pen) unfortunately memorialised my spelling error.

Malapropisms (NOT ‘Miss Marple-isms’)

Etymonline advises that malapropism means an “act or habit of misapplying words through ambition to use fine language”. The speaker wants to impress those listening and hopes to achieve this by using words not commonly heard in ordinary discourse. This grandiloquent style unfortunately falls flat when the wrong word is used.

Grandiloquent speeches tend to be filled with many pompous words or phrases. They are overly verbose, as the purpose is to impress listeners with one’s linguistic knowledge rather than to clearly convey a sincere message. The inclusion of malapropisms or other slips of the tongue ensures that the opposite effect is achieved.

Slips of the tongue in the boardroom

Some examples of malapropisms you might encounter during a board meeting include:
‘In lame man’s terms’ instead of ‘in layman’s terms’
‘Tenderhooks ‘instead of ‘tenterhooks’
‘Run the gambit’ instead of ‘run the gamut’
‘Opening gamut’ instead of ‘opening gambit’
‘She had to collaborate what I said’ instead of ‘She had to corroborate what I said’.

Consider whether gentle advice might be offered privately to a colleague who slips in this way, rather than embarrassing them during the meeting.

Slips of the ear

An eggcorn is a slip of the ear, where the use of a word or phrase results from a mishearing or misinterpretation of another. The term is understood to derive from the mishearing of the word ‘acorn’. An element of the original is substituted for one which sounds very similar (e.g. ‘for all intensive purposes’ instead of ‘for all intents and purposes’, ‘in one foul swoop’ instead of ‘in one fell swoop’, or ‘mute point’ instead of ‘moot point’).

A mondegreen is less likely to appear in a boardroom speech, as it is a misheard song lyric or recitation. Similar to an eggcorn, it substitutes words or phrases that were not heard clearly in the original performance or recording. Examples include:
“I get locked out, so I go out again” versus “I get knocked down, but I get up again”
“Hit me with your pet shark” versus “Hit me with your best shot“
“I guess he’s an expert, and I’m more an attorney” versus “I guess he’s an Xbox, and I’m more Atari“

Seek simplicity and clarity

The key message for directors and managers speaking at board meetings is to aim for clear and straightforward speech. Focus on substance and shared meaning rather than stylistic flourishes, or impressing people with your erudition. Not only will you achieve better governance, but you are also more likely to avoid slips of either the tongue or the ear.

The Feynman technique offers a helpful guide here. Richard Feynman was a Nobel Prize Physicist famous for the depth and breadth of his knowledge. His teaching was highly regarded by his students and colleagues because he made his knowledge accessible to them.

Feynman’s learning technique comprises four key steps:

• Select a concept to learn.
• Teach it to a child.
• Review and refine your understanding.
• Organise your notes and revisit them regularly.

Andrew Philips offered great advice in a 2022 Medium article on how to adapt the Feynman technique for business communication, summarised in the chart below.

Plain Language

Plain language is defined by the International Plain Language Federation as:

“A communication is in plain language if its wording, structure, and design are so clear that the intended readers can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information.”

https://www.iplfederation.org/plain-language/

The International Standard for Plain Language (ISO 24495-1:2023) was updated last year, and for those willing to pay for a copy, this may provide a useful reference.

Most English-speaking countries have proponents of plain language (or plain English), and their own sets of free guides and resources to help writers communicate more clearly. Some have legislated requirements that must be met by public agencies and civil servants, while others have style guides or manuals based on plain language principles.

Those of us who are not civil servants can also benefit from referring to these principles and guides. A selection of links to these resources is offered here.

The following chart summarises tips offered by the Plain English Foundation regarding the structure, design, and tightness of expression.

In brief

Clear communication does not require a vast vocabulary or grand linguistic flourishes. Rather, it is aided by short simple sentences. Whether speaking at a meeting or writing for a stakeholder audience, sticking to straightforward modes of expression will always enhance our communication effectiveness.

See also:
Discourse (Rhetoric) at Work
The choice between insightful and inciteful words
The case of the troublesome homonym