No. 7.—Godefroy de Danielz: Universitas, sive de omnibus rebus libri quattuor milia undeviginti (The University; or, the Four Thousand Nineteen Books on Every Subject).

“The tree of knowledge has precisely 4,019 branches,” Godefroy wrote in the preface to his first book. “We begin with the root of all of them, which is the knowledge of God. And first, it is necessary to establish, for the sake of our argument, whether the root of the tree can be properly considered a branch for the purposes of our classification of knowledge. In order to have a properly considered answer to this question, it will be necessary to begin with an understanding of the structure of trees. In the first chapter of the first book, therefore, we shall examine the seed, which is the beginning of the tree and therefore the beginning of our inquiry as well. In the second chapter of the first book, we shall begin our examination of the question of how seeds come to be, and whether the seeds of trees of different kinds are properly subsumed under the heading of seed, or whether more than one εἶδος is indicated by an inexact application of the term seed. In the third chapter of the first book, the seed of the common stone pine of our southern regions is examined. In the fourth chapter of our first book, the seed of the Aleppo pine common in the Levant is considered in its relation to the seed of the stone pine, and shown to be similar but not identical. In the fifth—”

This is as far as the surviving text goes: only the first leaf remains, the rest having been used to line a litter box for Godefroy’s cat Anaxagoras. It is not known how far Godefroy had proceeded with his work, but it is noted that Anaxagoras lived for seventeen years after Godefroy abandoned the project and never ran out of litter.

Every once in a while, Dr. Boli finds it necessary to tell the English-speaking world that it is not allowed to use a perfectly good word anymore. He always does so with regret, because it is not a light burden to be responsible for impoverishing our vocabulary. But by removing these words from circulation, we will make our communication more communicative.

Today we find it necessary to prohibit the word share.

Now, we hasten to explain, before widespread panic erupts, that we do not propose to ban it in all senses. There are still many meanings for which share is appropriate, and indeed the best possible word. “Remember, boys, we have only one shoe, so you two are going to have to share”: this is a good and proper use of the term, and no simpler word could be found to occupy the same place.

What we propose to ban is the use of the word share to mean say. Here is a writer for a technical blog about WordPress, the software that runs half the Internet, reporting information received from one of the people working on the project:

David Perez also shared that the Plugin Check plugin significantly reduced the time for reviews, bringing the average wait time down from 37 weeks to 9 weeks, even as plugin submissions have almost doubled.

—Article at WPTavern.

David Perez said that. “Said” is the only word you need to describe what he did.

Why do we object to this use of share? It seems to be everywhere, after all, so perhaps it is just becoming part of the English language. Most people under a certain age will say “he shared that…” instead of “he told me that…” or “he said that…,” and language does change, after all.

But there are two problems with this use of the word. The first, which is probably the more important of the two, is that it grates on Dr. Boli’s ears like fingernails on a blackboard, or even like Dan Schutte songs. But the other problem with using “shared” for “said,” aside from making you sound like a squishy pop psychologist, is that it creates an unconscious suggestion of reliability. “Said” simply tells us that someone made this statement, and we are permitted to judge its reliability as we would any statement from that source. “Shared” implies that this is a fact, and the person who stated it is allowing us to partake in the knowledge. It cannot be judged. Someone took the trouble to share this valuable information with us. Isn’t that nice? You would be an awful person if you doubted this statement.

In fact, psychologists use the word for exactly that reason. If they have a group of shy and vulnerable people in therapy, they will ask if one of them has something to share. This implies that it is safe to say anything in this environment: no one will call you a liar or a weirdo. Share implies that the statement cannot be doubted. In this limited way, perhaps, it has a use. Dr. Boli objects when it spills out of its connotation of cozy positivity and tries to take over the duties of the usefully neutral “say.”

When we are writing a news article and reporting the speech or email statement or microblog wittering of someone in a position of influence, we do not mean to say that the person making the statement is a good and worthy person. What we mean is just that the person made the statement. It is news; it can be judged.

The difference is subtle, perhaps, but it is also important. Try using the word shared for a statement from a source you don’t trust. “Chairman Mao shared that imperialists and all reactionaries are bean-curd tigers.” “Chancellor Hitler shared that Jews and Gypsies are vermin and must be eliminated from the Reich.” Shared carries a load of connotation with it; it is not a drop-in replacement for said.

Dr. Boli knows that there are English teachers who teach their pupils that they should not say “said” every time they report someone’s speech—that they should vary their vocabulary and use “stated” or “declared” or “enunciated” or “shared.” Those English teachers ought to be punished, and the universe has arranged that they will be punished by having to read the essays their pupils write. To use the same word for the same meaning is a sound principle in writing; ransacking Roget’s is the sign of a poor thinker as well as a poor writer.

Therefore, by the power vested in him by his own overweening arrogance, Dr. Boli decrees that, henceforth, the use of the word share to mean say is not permitted.