Word Nerd Subcommittee on GROW
 

Here is question I am putting before the Word Nerd Subcommittee on GROW.

Is this usage approved in the USA? Should we issue a statement and deplore it?

In all, Reagan grew the federal civilian workforce by about 200,000; (…)

On defense, yes, Reagan grew the Pentagon's budget, but he also negotiated (…)
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/what-palin-and-other-gop-leaders-doesnt-get-about-ronald-reagan/71178/

Janice--

I think that this usage has been common only in the past five years or so; that's only an impression, with no data to back it up. It bothered me the first several times I heard it, but I can't say quite why. It just doesn't seem idiomatic or entirely logical. We do grow flowers, and grass, but we don't grow children; "grow" is a transitive verb, but I'm not sure it can take just any object. I wish I could articulate a solid reason for deploring this construction; I would never use it myself.

One word nerd's opinion!

Best,
Jean

I think it's a fairly common usage, especially in the context of government. It's a bit wonky, perhaps, but it generally raises no eyebrows. I think it's pretty much an exact equivalent for the transitive verb "expand."

My first knowledge of this abomination dates from the last millennium, specifically, the Dark Ages of Monica Lewinky and William Clinton. He used it.

It is in fairly common usage, but I'm with Jean on it, and I think it goes something like this:

To grow vegetables, or a beard, or a replacement tail is to take a thing from its origins to its fruition. But Reagan didn't start from scratch when he (allegedly) furthered or expanded the economy's growth. An analogy might be the difference between raising and fostering. Reagan (supposedly) fostered the economy's growth, I raised my green beans.

But that is no more than a stab at it. I am not deeply wedded to this formulation.


David R.

Thank you fellow Word Nerders. I had never seen it before and hope to never see it again.

I wish.

I've heard it over here (UK) for many years, but only in the context of 'grow the business', so I thought it was business jargon 'meaning 'expand, increase or develop'. The examples Janice and others give makes me think the expression has widened in use in the USA.

A footnote taken from the OED

GROW

†e. To cause to increase, to enlarge. Obs.—1

1481 Caxton Godfrey clxix. 250 Whan dauid had regned vii. yere in Ebron he grewe [F. creut] and amended moche this cyte [Jerusalem].

What goes around...

Clive

It seems I should get out more.

1481, eh? Story of my life--I am either too old or too young.

It's very, very common usage in the financial sector. Every firm is expected "to grow revenues", "to grow cash flow" etc., every quarter, so in the context of the budget deficit, it sets off no alarms for me.

But, as David R points out, it's used only where the thing growing already exists.

Now I've had me morning coffee and cleared me thoughts.

Thanks for more input, Michael, and welcome to the Sphere.

I have translated many financial statements, and I might accept the phrase "to grow revenues" with few or no qualms, as that implies a stewardship, a caretaking, an active and direct influence exerted on something already existing (in line with David's comment.) As in "During CEO Smith's five years in office, he concentrated on the North African market and grew cell phone revenue to an unprecedented level." (In analogy with "drove".)

Or "Using only the computer in one corner of his bedroom, a small businessman grew" (in the sense nutured) "his firm to a global enterprise in only seventeen months."

But to "grow a budget", when 1) only part of a budget has been expanded, and 2) that part receives a sudden increase (as when the anticipated tax income to budget 2011 is set to double that of the preceding year), rather than a measureable increase over time, distresses me. The latter, at least metaphorically, resembles "growth" but the former usage goes against my wooden-headed grain.

Securities grow in value, but I balk at, say, "When Mr. Jones was president of World Bank, he grew the interest rates (or the bank's debt)." A former President Anybody might influence financial trends which in turn influence the ups and downs of market values, but he does not "grow" them.

I can, however, see the propaganda value of using the term this way, as it implies that some person in power has/had sole accountability for a fiscal result. And possibly the unexpected (to some) use of the word in this way would hammer the point home. And possibly that is why the word was chosen.

To bamboozle.

Janice, I speak as one who has to listen to discussions of legislative spending all the time. I am confident that nothing anybody says, anywhere, will reduce usage of "grew" as a transitive verb governing "budget" by members, staff, and media. It's useful, brief, understood by those who are using it, and exactly on point. We fuss in vain.

Thanks for weighing in on this, Maryann. I always listen up when you speak on matters lingual.

I realized quickly that I was fighting an uphill battle and should save the Subcommittee's gunpowder for some other skirmish.

Doesn't make me like it though. Grrr.

I'm not crazy about it, either, Janice. But I look at it this way: other verbs have transitive and intransitive senses. "Boil" is one. Extending or transferring the meanings of a word is something we do a lot. And it always starts with what we call mistakes, quick though I often am to stomp them. I just think we should pick our fights.

About shifts and changes in meaning: How many of us are still using "nice" only to mean "careful" or "exact"? Or "fond" to mean "foolish" (as in Milton)?

I am not complaining about words changing. Of course they do. And one generation's carelessness is the next generation's common speech.

That said, I don't have to like it and I don't. But I waved my white flag long ago when I saw I was fighting a war that was already over.

As we often see in the crits of poems here, there is a wide variety of interpretations. So benchmarks are needed.

Before there is the usual rush to throw the usual rotten tomatoes at a perceived reactionary, I reassert that I am not against inventiveness. To be inventive often gives a competitive lingual edge. Growing the budget" might an example of that. It opens to window dressing of financial statements or reports, then it is picked up by the duller ones as meaningful, and then it becomes as a much of a cliche as "the bottom line" and "the end of the day" or "military advisors".

No one is quite sure what it means, and everyone is vaguely sure of its meaning and besides it wakes up the perusers of the financial section.

If you segue [musical term 'commonized' the last 8 or so years] into psychology and especially psychotherapy you'll find 'grow' mushroomimg like after rain these past 12 or so years especially along with their adapted friends boundaries and validate.