• Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

More on ‘So’

December 19, 2011, 7:37 pm

So. That’s no way to start a sentence, much less answer a question. Or is it? “So,” as Ben Yagoda wrote on this blog last month, is a word in transition, taking on newly expanded, assertively vague meanings. Its use as a sentence opener (“So, I just went to Mexico”) instead of a conjunction (“We were hungry, so we ate”) is on the rise, though no one agrees on where it originates or exactly what it means. Jonathan Lethem described his character Perkus Tooth’s use of it in his 2009 novel, Chronic City, after Tooth starts a conversation by saying, “So, I’ll lend you my own copy of Echolalia, even though I never lend anything. Because I think you ought to see it.”

“This ‘so’ of Perkus’s—his habit of introducing any subject as if in resumption of earlier talk,” Lethem’s narrator explains, “wasn’t in any way coercive. Rather, it was as if Perkus had startled himself from a daydream, heard an egging voice in his head and mistaken it for yours.”

But the usage is hardly novel. It appears in Beowulf (Seamus Heaney translates the opening word, “Hwaet” as “so”), and in Shakespeare (“So this is the Forest of Arden,” says Rosalind in As You Like It).

What’s new is its growing—and bewildering—use in response to questions. In a recent meeting, I asked my colleagues how we were going to compile a contact list for a project we were planning. “So we have a program that will do this,” someone responded. “So?” What had I missed? The speaker seemed to be rejoining a previous conversation; he was talking not in response to me, but in spite of me, at once eliding what I’d said and continuing from it. I think he meant “Well,” (I even think he meant well), and was probably not aware that his comment was anti-semantic. Still, the usage conveys a pushy disregard for whatever precedes it.

Boing Boing readers were recently nettled by the high rate of “so” delivered in response to questions on National Public Radio, particularly by science experts, and specifically on the show Science Friday. As one noted, “I’d say this usage of ‘so’ was a synonym for ‘um,’ except that there isn’t even any hesitation before moving on to the rest of the sentence. It’s just spoken as if it actually meant something contextually, but it’s just tacked on without meaning.”

The misuse of “so” as a conjunction with a lost clause is generally more confounding than contrarian. But when “so” scoots to the end of a sentence, the effect is downright antisocial. At a 2011 Book Expo America panel, for example, one author repeatedly punctuated her sentences with an inconclusive “so” as (approximately) follows: “I’ve always been interested in definitions of race, so.” Then she looked around hopefully, as if to solicit help clambering out of her own construction.

This periodic “so” has the opposite effect of the full frontal “so.” It’s tentative (leaving the listener to guess what was not said) and passive aggressive (the speaker at once declines to complete the sentence and continues to hold the floor ). Just like “whatever,” the grungy catchphrase of the aughts, “so,” in this context, communicates refusal. I’ll talk, the speaker says, but I’m only going so far. And like “whatever,” it’s a cop out for people who distrust language–and don’t mind stranding you on the far side of an ellipsis. Their “so” forces you to interrupt them in order to resume the discussion.

And so this modest little conjunction woke up one day to find itself on the rack, no longer merely linking clauses by standing between them, but also stretching, head to toe, along them. A new twist on it compounds the torture: “So, yeah.” Used to close a statement, it’s a popular teen affectation, but adults–who should know better—employ it too. The sentence is not finished, the meaning is not clarified, and yet—how nice! The speaker agrees with whatever he did not say! “This person was a huge influence on me, so, yeah.” No argument there.

“So.” It’s a way of starting a sentence, answering a question, and taunting grammarphiles who would like to see it resume its proper station, anchored by a relevant clause and a reason for being. But having migrated forward, then backward, before nodding in agreement with itself, its shows no sign of complying. And so it goes.

Margot Mifflin is an associate professor of English at Lehman College of the City University of New York and director of the arts and culture program at CUNY’s Graduate School of Journalism. She is the author of The Blue Tattoo: The Life of Olive Oatman.

This entry was posted in Words. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • dw

    But the usage is hardly novel. It appears in Beowulf (Seamus Heaney translates the opening word, “Hwaet” as “so”),

    “Appearing in Seamus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf” is hardly the same thing as “Appearing in Beowulf”!

    That aside, this post is the kind of thing rightly categorized by Language Log as “prescriptivist poppycock”.

    • 11223435

      So?

  • Bittybis

    I think it is used primarily to avoid the appearance of commanding authority in our current authority-phobic culture. It is shorthand for “I am now going to present a fact or situation established by others and for which I bear no responsibility.”

  • mbelvadi

    I too first noticed the initial “so” being used by scientists, on CBC’s equivalent to Science Friday, called Quirks and Quarks.  For a long while, I thought that the radio show producers were editing out for time something (eg paraphrasing the question) that the speaker had said before the “so”!

  • cleverclogs

    I think the intent on NPR is to somehow imply “I get you. We’re on the same page.” Whenever I hear it, my assumption is that the interviewee is trying to show that s/he is so well-versed in the topic that not only did s/he anticipate this question, but s/he can almost complete the interviewer’s thought. Hence the “so” – as if the two are in the middle of one shared thought. So (!) the interview is less like a conversation and more like a vaudeville routine.

  • dank48

    Personally, I find the conclusive/assertive “so” more irritating than “So” as an introduction. There’s nothing particularly new about it; for me the definitive example can be heard on Woodstock, as Joan Baez says (more or less), “This song is for my husband David, who’s serving two years in the federal penitentiary for draft evasion, so, uh . . .”  The implication seems to be that one’s moral superiority is so self-evident that it’s simply not necessary to continue. Even at the time, this struck me as too easy.

    To Ms. Baez’s credit, she seems to have grown up at least as much as the rest of us in the past forty-plus years; some of us have merely gotten older.

  • 12049089

    Here in northern Wisconsin, “And so.” is a complete response.  As in:
    Person #1: “I got my hairs cut today.”
    Person #2: “And so!”

  • nordicexpat

    Well, I guess out of politeness I should welcome you, but I really hope this is not indicative of the type of posts you’re going to write. 

    Rather than just make up things about what “so” as a discourse marker means, you could actually do some research on the topic (I know it is a blog, but I expect more from first-year students) Here’s a place to start:

    http://www.gloriacappelli.it/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/so.pdf

    • big_giant_head

      Hm.  I admit that I only read the abstract, but that article does not appear to really address the particular uses of “so” that this author is–rightly–annoyed by.

    • lazybones

      Interesting reference. However, it deals solely with the use of an initial “So” to launch an incipient topic (one that both parties understand has been postponed, or was on the agenda). This is not at all the use described in this blog post, which appears to involve an almost meaningless verbal tic rather than a functional discourse marker.

  • MarjoryMunson

    It’s good that so has only two letters and thus cannot be drawn out as is wha-a-a-t ev-er-r-r-r!

    • jffoster

      Soooooo……,

      • MarjoryMunson

        True – but say the two and the wha-a-a-t ev-er-r-r-r is more irritating in its sound.

  • haroldfs

    I don’t see “so” as a sentence opener as a new thing–I think it’s been around a long time.  To me
    beginning a sentence with “so” or even just saying “so” is short for “So what?”  I’ve heard that
    as a sort of defiant answer to things other people claim since I was a kid.

  • greeneyeshade

    “Just so” is another idiomatic expression used in different ways.  One is wanting things to be perfectly arranged: just so.  Another is used as shorthand at the end of an analogy.  In this latter situation, the analagous situation is compared to the one being described.  Just so.

  • isugeezer

    “So” has also become annoyingly ubiquitous as a replacement for “very.”  ["I love you so much."  "You are so right."]  Gack.

    • beedhamm

      You say, “You are very right”?

  • juliasweig

    I have noticed the use of So,… at the beginning of a response to a question as a barely veiled way of displaying the speaker’s contempt for the question itself and low regard for the knowledge base of the person doing the asking. As if to say, ‘So, do I really have to explain what should be patently obvious,’ or “So, here’s how you should have phrased that question and why I am the only person who really knows what they’re talking about…” 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jamie-Raskin/741140827 Jamie Raskin

    I am happy that Professor Mifflin has taken on the insufferably smug use of the word “so” at the start of sentences to signal that the speaker not only anticipated your point but has already long since refuted it and will now, laboriously, reconstruct his or her bullet-proof reasoning while you wait.  I hear the word “so,” when used in this way, as a proxy for “well, you may not have heard yet, but our line on that is obviously . . .”  This affectation is so replete in academic discourse I am afraid I don’t even hear it any more.  Thanks for lifting our discourse a little above the so-so.   

  • fromheretothere

    Love the post topic…but more so the word gems that made me smile for the rest of the day:

    “…probably not aware that his comment was anti-semantic.”

    “…stranding you on the far side of an ellipsis.”

    (And just what category does the above usage of “so” fall into?)

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037