The New Yorker asked which one single word should be eradicated from English, and lots of people answered. Some popular candidates:

· literally (we should keep this one, but misuse should be punishable by death; we recently got a pitch for a story that said, "The conference was literally mind blowing"—um, NO, BUT TOO BAD IT WASN'T)
· actually (should also be kept, but people should cease overuse [cough PAUL CONSTANT cough])
· awesome (again, overused, and almost always used outside its real meaning, but doesn't it always make you feel good—maybe a little dumb, but good?)
· moist (a perenially unfavorite and amply discussed at the link above)

The winner/loser is after the jump (in case the post at the link is too long for you to read—it's at the end of it).

And the winner/loser is...


Personally, I like "slacks." I think it connotes a certain style of pants that we don't have another good word for. Also, one doesn't see the word much—what's the big objection? It sounds a little gross, but then the pants we're talking about aren't pretty.

Anyhow, over at The New Yorker, "Mary Norris, of the magazine’s venerable copy department, will write 'slacks' on a piece of paper, crumple it, and throw it away." Which seems great.