[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.211.168.204. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
September 18, 1954

MISUSED EXPRESSIONS

Author Affiliations

2236 Pratt Ave., Chicago 45.

JAMA. 1954;156(3):274-275. doi:10.1001/jama.1954.02950030066023

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

To the Editor:—  From time to time in this section, a voice is raised in defense of correct medical phraseology. This appeal is not made by the purists in grammar, the classicists in language tradition, or the provincial perfectionists who are critical of all terminology except their own. It is made by those who have occasion to read manuscripts for publication and who review medical articles and books for the scientific literature. It is well, therefore, that at intervals attention should be called to the commoner errors in this field. Editors of scientific journals probably wince at some of the material they inspect, and it is well known that some papers presented for publication receive rejection slips because of the misuse of conventional expressions that are presumed to be in good favor. If a case report or a medical essay is worthy of being shared by others in the literature,

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×