The Illusionicity of Smartitude

The processness of languagification has been dumbnified by the increasing prevalitude of lax adjectivinal, adverbious, and sometimes verbious or even nounivial standards. In days of yore, a certain strictliness of vocabularinal modulicinity was prized. It was taken as a sign of a well-ordered mind, of a certain rigor or perspicacuity of the intellilect. Yet now, it seems that the more intellectuous one wishes to seem, the less one strives to adhere to establishized norms, and the more one seeks to express one's thoughts creativinally.

Is that really such a problem? One might well ask: what's so wrong about a little creativitousness? Point taken. When one restricts one's vocabulary to the real words that are widely available, such creativisionism is no obstacle to communicatude. But all too often today, we see would-be intellectualisticos stooping to ad hoc invention of wild, ephemeristic words willy-nilly, as if on the fly. The result? Inexactition of language, and sloppification of thought!

Make no mistake: what I'm advocating here is not a broad, wholesale strictifying or properification of language. I just want to inject a little moderacy. Language's purpose is to serve a basically communicatudinal role. It undercuts that purpose to throw around a lot of words that no one really knows how to use.

Well, almost no one.