If you're a journalist or someone writing for the media, using the word "shock" implies the person survived an electrical injury, whereas the word "electrocute" implies they died. So, yeah, if you want to write professionally, you'll need to know that distinction. I don't know why I'm telling you this, but now you know!
1,736 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by MBaer
213 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by looseangel
17,148 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by pivotalHarry
384 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by GarlicToast
67 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by JonathanDoe
15 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Fluffster
4 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by gameboy9725
30,539 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by Yamaraus
111 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by insideAfireball
160 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by Myrsan
152 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by forseeker
10,849 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by WaxWorm
1,232 Comments - Last post 19 minutes ago by Ninglor03
319 Comments - Last post 52 minutes ago by Ivannes
Okay, but- if I am a journalist, and a I write a "shocking reveal", and someone gets a heart attack and dies from it, does it become an "electrocuting reveal"? 😏
Medically speaking, as well as according to the dictionaries I checked, electrocute should mean any serious or fatal injury derived from electricity [though 'electric shock' appears to be more commonly used in referencing any severity of injury], while [circulatory] shock is a term instead more typically used to refer to a life-threatening lack of blood flow, though it can also be used to apply to things such as [being in a state of] psychological shock.
Even non-medically, I've only ever heard shock as it relates to electricity being used to reference minor injuries [eg, "Ouch, I shocked myself!" versus "Timmy shoved a fork into the outlet and electrocuted himself and now he's not moving!"] so it's curious about where journalism makes its distinction (especially as Google makes it rather clear that it's a very consistent distinction in journalism).
Further googling indicates that the fatal injury usage was the original meaning of electrocution (created upon the first use of the electric chair, as a combination of electric and execution) and, as such, it seems that journalism simply adheres to a more classic interpretation of the word than other groups. From what I found it seems that at least forensic terminology also utilizes electrocution with the same distinction, so it's not exclusive to journalism, however.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I believe it would be an "electrocuting reveal." Haha! And that is quite a lot more information than I expected. Well done, my friend, you win the English-etymology award for the day. If you win this giveaway, I hope you enjoy your stay in the city under the sea, as you contemplate the origins of the many verbs being used to describe the actions of murdering some crazy people!
Comment has been collapsed.
I was shocked to learn this. :o Thank you!
Comment has been collapsed.
Likewise I believe drowning and starving also relate to death but are often used in circumstances when death did not occur.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you! I have learned something new today.
Comment has been collapsed.