[5-6 of 44 commonly confused words]
I’ve been prompted by a comment on this site (h/t Rick), and by seeing flaunt for flout recently, to revise and republish this post from the early days of this blog.
What’s the issue?
Put simply, it is this: Are people who write sentences such as ‘motorists who blatantly flaunt the regulations for their safety and well-being’ (instead of flout) woefully ignorant dunderheads who need remedial English and should not be allowed into print, or are they just following a long-standing and perfectly legitimate linguistic trend?
How you answer that question defines your place on the descriptive-prescriptive spectrum (if you answered yes to the first alternative, you are probably an out-and-out prescriptivist). Your answer could also depend on where you live, and which dictionary or usage guide you take as your bible.
What do these words mean?
Though sounding similar, they have—at least in origin—rather different meanings. If you flaunt something, you show it off in a way which is brash and overdone. The very use of the word suggests that you don’t approve of whoever is doing the flaunting. Typical things that people flaunt are their wealth, their sexuality, and themselves, or bits of their anatomy (ahem!).
He flaunts his riches like everyone in the business.
Women should have it both ways—they should be able to flaunt their sexuality and be taken seriously.
Katie seemed to be flaunting herself a little too much for Elizabeth’s liking.
If you flout a law, rules, regulations, convention, and semantically related nouns, you do not obey them, and you treat them with blatant disregard.
Around 10 smokers were openly flouting the ban when the Health Board’s environmental health inspectors arrived.
Spain s Duchess of Alba, known as the ‘rebel noble,’ has died at age 88. The wealthiest woman in Spain, she was also a bohemian, famous for her eccentric style and for flouting convention in numerous ways.
In another case, it rejected the appeal of a New Mexico photographer accused of flouting anti-discrimination laws by refusing to photograph a same-sex wedding.
A quote from Chinua Achebe (1987) illustrates the confusion between the two. ‘Your Excellency, let us not flaunt the wishes of the people.’ ‘Flout, you mean,’ I said. ‘The people?’ asked His Excellency, ignoring my piece of pedantry.
Unlike some other pairs of confusable words, such as lord/laud, the confusion here seems to work only in one direction. IOW, people do not use flout instead of flaunt.
What do dictionaries and usage guides say?
Merriam-Webster gives that transitive use of flaunt two definitions.
1 to display ostentatiously or impudently:
2 to treat contemptuously
while adding a note, which states that the use of flaunt in this way ‘undoubtedly arose from confusion with flout’, but that the contexts in which it appears cannot be considered ‘substandard’.
On the other side of the pond, Oxford Dictionaries Online (ODO) states categorically that the two words ‘may sound similar but they have different meanings’. The 1993 draft addition to the OED entry for flaunt notes that the usage ‘clearly arose by confusion, and is widely considered erroneous’.
Various British usage guides maintain the distinction rigidly, and the Economist style guide’s witty note runs ‘Flaunt means display; flout means disdain. If you flout this distinction, you will flaunt your ignorance’. The Australian Macquarie Dictionary notes ‘Flaunt is commonly confused with flout’.
Nevertheless, ODO admits that in the Oxford English Corpus (OEC) ‘the second and third commonest objects of flaunt, after wealth, are law and rules’.
What does the evidence say?
Other corpora (Corpus of Contemporary American, the NOW corpus, and the Global Corpus of web-based English (GloWbE) present a similar picture of the most frequent collocates of flaunt. For instance, in GloWbE, the most common noun object of flaunt is wealth, followed in equal second place by body and law. The other corpora show a similar pattern.
However, if you look at relative frequency, that is, at how often each verb has as its object a noun in the semantic field of ‘law, regulation, etc.’, things start to look rather different. For instance, in GloWbE again, you have the following (flout/flaunt) ratio:
That shows a percentage of between 10 and 15 per cent for flaunt with those collocates. Figures from the NOW corpus show a rather lower percentage, which may be due to its being journalistic, and therefore more ‘edited’:
So, while Merriam-Webster is less prescriptive than Oxford, Macquarie, and British style guides, in that it accepts the contested use, these figures suggest that many, many more writers across the twenty varieties of English represented in the corpora mentioned actually maintain the distinction than those that ignore it.
Given the current state of things, any reply to my original question has to be nuanced. So, if you read something that contains collocations such as flaunt…rules, regulations, convention, you could try to suppress a sigh for the total collapse and degradation of the English language and just give the writer the benefit of the doubt: it is presumably part of her or his idiolect.
Flaunt has been used to mean ‘flout’ since the 1920s, according to that draft addition to the OED entry, and appears regularly, particularly in journalistic writing. At least one dictionary recognizes it as having that meaning; in the long run, others may accept it too.
On the other hand, if you are writing or editing something, there is an argument that it would be wise to maintain the distinction, and, possibly, tactfully, raise the issue with the author. In that way, you or they might avoid the involuntary sighs of some of your (probably older) readers as they are distracted from the content of your message by what they see as a flaw in its form.