Well, in the museum field I keep fending off the word "edutainment." It's the implication that education itself can't be or isn't somehow fun in the first place that bothers me! When I'm planning museum education programs, I just assume that it had better be engaging or noone will bother to pay attention. Also in the academic land of history / material culture studies, the word "nuanced" is really overused. A richly nuanced interpretation of this or that. . . does that just mean a scholar has payed attention to the details and come up with some interesting conclusions of her own? I suppose it's not completely without meaning, but it is certainly used (utilized?) to excess. By the way, I have always ranted about the use of "utilize" instead of plain old "use" but just now I looked in the dictionary and there is a, um, nuance to "utilize" that I hadn't realized. "Use" is defined simply as "the act of employing anything," while "utilize" is defined as "to make useful; turn to profitable account or use" (and, lastly, "to make use of"). There is a difference (and richly nuanced, at that), but the problem is that people use them interchangeably. Why use one syllable when three will do? Margaret