Here’s a semantic construction I hadn’t heard before. (This was on SportsCenter, or some sports show, on the weekend.)
(1) Nevada upset Gonzaga by 19 points on Saturday.
That isn’t, or at least wasn’t, a sentence in my dialect.
I could say each of the following.
(2) Nevada beat Gonzaga by 19 points on Saturday.
(3) Nevada upset Gonzaga on Saturday.
But transitive ‘upset’ couldn’t be modified by a margin of victory. Maybe I just had a quirk in my dialect and I should remove it, but (1) still sounds odd to me. I might try using the dialect in which ‘upset’ can be modified this way and see if it starts sounding more natural with use. With the way the NCAA tournament is going, I should have plenty of opportunities to try.
I have no theory whatsoever as to why in my native dialect this modification is (was) impermissible. One would think that the beating would be a constituent of the upsetting, and hence that any permissible modifier of ‘beat’ could latch on to that constituent. But apparently not, at least not in the language I spoke until a few days ago.
Sounds like perfectly good and common sportscasterese to me— which isn’t to say that it’s in everyday U.S. usage, but most sportscasterese consists of statements I wouldn’t use when describing a game in conversation.
Old radio news story: my college radio station’s news department tended to attract news junkies who didn’t necessarily know much about sports. (An exception was Aaron Schatz, who writes the Lycos 50 and has sometimes written for TAP online and TNR online.) But they’d try to emulate sportscasterese as best they could. I eventually wrote a style and usage guide stipulating, for example, what the minimum margin was in each sport before one could say “blowout,” explaining that baseball didn’t have “points,” etc.
This probably wasn’t the first innovation Sportscenter has made to the English language. Boo-yah!
I believe, technically, it is only an “upset” if a lower rated Gonzaga team wins. I higher rated Gonzaga team losing is never an upset because Gonzaga is always ranked too high.
“Lord Angelo dukes it well in his absence . . . “
What’s more worrisome is the adaptation of the sportspeak dialect into common usage.
(Though “Red Sox beats Yanks 5-4/On Chapman’s Homer” suggests it ain’t all bad.)
A-and Wilson only upset Europe by 14 points.
I’ll put in another vote for (1) sounding fine.
“Red Sox beats Yanks 5-4/On Chapman’s Homer”
Red Sox ace J. Keats gets the win and (in a controversial decision by the official scorer), H. Cortez gets credit for the save.
Red Sox officials declined to comment on the status of their contract negotiations with Keats, who reportedly is seeking “realms of gold” to forego free agency . . .
(1) sounds perfectly good to me. I’m curious about the dialect in which it is impermissible. How do you feel about the following?
(4) Nevada almost upset Gonzaga.
(5) Nevada just barely upset Gonzaga.
(6) Nevada just barely managed to upset Gonzaga.
(7) “Nevada upset Gonzaga.” “Just barely, right?” “No, by 19 points!”
(8) Nevada thoroughly upset Gonzaga.
I don’t really see the problem with 1). In fact I kind of like it because it crams quite a bit of information into a short sentence:
Nevada and Gonzaga played Saturday.
Nevada beat Gonzaga by 19 points.
Gonazaga was expected to win in the Saturday game against Gonazaga.
My long-winded style could take some advice from that sportscaster.
It also strikes me as unorthodox. Still, I suppose that if the broadcaster meant, “Nevada upset Gonzaga — by 19 points! — on Saturday,” you would be content?
We should also consider the possibility that this was intended to communicate information about the spread (that is, communicating both that there was a seeding upset, and a spread upset), but then this might be overly compact.
Another typical way a sports broadcaster would say this is:
Nevada beat Gonzaga by 19 points on Saturday in a(n) (adjective) upset!
The adjective would likely be stunning, shocking, surprising, astonishing, etc. depending on the teams involved.
Lots of good points here. On Jonathan’s question, I find “Nevada almost upset Gonzaga” fine, but “Nevade easily upset Gonzaga” questionable. I have no idea why that could be.
Yet another vote for (1) sounding fine. I think that once you let in “upset” as a verb in this sense this formulation was inevitable. Part of the reason I like it is that its meaning is obvious and it concisely puts all of the things Sebastian says.
Jonathan’s (8) sounds bad to me, though. One problem is that it’s not clear from it whether Nevada beat Gonzaga by a lot or whether Gonzaga was favored by a lot.
Does Gonzaga just win the same number of games no matter where they’re seeded, or is it that they’re more likely to win when they’re not favored?
The CNN news crawler just told me
(1) Illini routes Cincinnati, 92-68.
How does that sound? Maybe 92 and 68 are buses.
I think sportswriters use “shock” to describe a game in which the presumed lesser team took the presumed greater team out to the woodshed. In other words, this game was too one-sided to be an “upset.” Remember, the original Upset beat Man O’ War by half a length out of 6 furlongs.
Verbing nouns weirds them.
Yesterday my stomach was upset while visiting Nevada. I think I ate too much Gonzaga cheese.
No doubt language innovations introduced by sportscasters are distressing. But you can’t stop them, you can only hope to contain them.
I’m confused…upset is a perfectly good verb. “Upset the applecart”, e.g.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review