December 21, 1999

nonplussed

What is going on with the word nonplussed? In the last year I've seen it used everywhere from The New York Times to the ESPN web site to mean 'unimpressed' or 'indifferent', when, as far as I can tell, the only correct definition is 'confused' or 'perplexed'. Example 1: New York Times caption, late January: "Despite aggressive television reporting, patrons at the bar at the Delano Drive restaurant in the Waterside Plaza apartments in Manhattan said they were nonplussed by President Clinton's State of the Union message." Example 2: ESPN web headline: "Brewer's Pitchers Nonplussed at Joining History." Has the usage of this word changed to mean 'unimpressed' instead of 'confused'? Frankly, I'm nonplussed.

The correct meaning of nonplussed is ‘utterly perplexed; completely puzzled’. It’s derived from the Latin phrase non plus ‘not more, no further’—referring to a state in which nothing more can be done. To be nonplussed is to be at a total loss as to what to say or do. (In the Latin phrase, there should be a macron over the “o” and “u”—does anyone out there know how to do this in HTML?)

It’s puzzling as to how nonplussed has come to mean ‘undisturbed, unimpressed, indifferent’. The prefix non- means ‘not, no’, but the word plussed has no meaning in English. It’s likely that the negative prefix makes one think the meaning must be ‘not something’ rather than ‘utterly or completely something.’ Or there may be an analogy with unfazed, a word with a similar meaning.

The correct meaning of nonplussed does prevail, although there are quite a few instances of the new meaning to which you refer. A few examples: “Gates seemed nonplussed by the Net until late 1995. By 1996 he became a fanatic.” (ZDNet, 1999) “Both authors are nonplussed by the notion of dog fashion shows. ‘If you don’t compromise the dog, what the hell?’ Ms. Knapp said.” (TheNew York Times, 1999)

I must say I was utterly perplexed by the entry in the recently published The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage: “Nonplused does not mean fazed or unfazed. It means bewildered to the point of speechlessness.” To me, it does (more or less) mean ‘fazed’ but does not mean ‘unfazed’. Despite this confusion, perhaps The New York Times copyeditors should pay more attention to the basically sound advice in their usage book. The fact that this book takes on the topic shows that the meaning of nonplussed has indeed become an issue; the previous edition did not have an entry for this word.

Incidentally, the spelling nonplussed is more common than nonplused, at least in American English. The double “s” occurs because the second syllable is stressed.

Carol