What do you think?
Rate this book
Like: A History of the World's Most Hated (and Misunderstood) Word
A comprehensive and thought-provoking investigation into one of the most polarizing words in the English language.
Few words in the English language are as misunderstood as “like.” Indeed, excessive use of this word is a surefire way to make those who pride themselves on propriety, both grammatical and otherwise, feel compelled to issue correctives.
But what the detractors of this word fail to understand is its true function and versatility—as an exclamation, a filler of space, a means of subtle emphasis, and more. “Like” may have started out as slang, but it is now an intrinsic component of fun, serious, and altogether nurturing communication. And like any colloquialism, the word endears the speaker to its audience; a conversation full of likes feels more casual, despite its content.
In this book, culture writer and editor for Dwell magazine Megan C. Reynolds takes us through the unique etymology and usage of this oft-reviled word, highlighting how it is often used to undermine people who are traditionally seen as having less status in society—women, younger people, people from specific subcultures—and how, if thought about differently, it might open up a new way of communication and validation. Written in a breezy yet informative and engaging style, this is a must-read for anyone who considers themselves a grammarian, a lover of language, and an advocate for the marginalized in discussions of cultural capital, power, and progress.
Few words in the English language are as misunderstood as “like.” Indeed, excessive use of this word is a surefire way to make those who pride themselves on propriety, both grammatical and otherwise, feel compelled to issue correctives.
But what the detractors of this word fail to understand is its true function and versatility—as an exclamation, a filler of space, a means of subtle emphasis, and more. “Like” may have started out as slang, but it is now an intrinsic component of fun, serious, and altogether nurturing communication. And like any colloquialism, the word endears the speaker to its audience; a conversation full of likes feels more casual, despite its content.
In this book, culture writer and editor for Dwell magazine Megan C. Reynolds takes us through the unique etymology and usage of this oft-reviled word, highlighting how it is often used to undermine people who are traditionally seen as having less status in society—women, younger people, people from specific subcultures—and how, if thought about differently, it might open up a new way of communication and validation. Written in a breezy yet informative and engaging style, this is a must-read for anyone who considers themselves a grammarian, a lover of language, and an advocate for the marginalized in discussions of cultural capital, power, and progress.
Audible Audio
First published July 1, 2025
27 people are currently reading
2925 people want to read
About the author
Megan C. Reynolds
1 book4 followersMegan C. Reynolds is an editor at Dwell magazine, and previously worked at the now defunct Jezebel and The Billfold. She’s written for Buzzfeed, the New York Times, Elle, Gawker, Bustle, Vulture, and other outlets. Megan was also the co-host of the short-lived, celebrity-gossip focused podcast Dirtcast. She lives in New York City.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews
August 6, 2025
this was interesting… but also, kinda boring? I felt like this could’ve been a really great long-form article, and I’m still not convinced there was enough material to stretch into a full book. that said, I did really enjoy listening to it & found the topic… like… genuinely fascinating! ;)
the book’s strongest moments were when it explored how “like” functions as a way of validating your own feelings. a little offering of vulnerability that invites the other person to do the same. I also enjoyed the side tangents about other conversational fillers (like “hella”) and how language evolves within subcultures. but sometimes it felt like we were meandering without a clear destination. of course, in the end, it all circles back to misogyny (sigh). one line that stuck with me was: “it’s more important to be understood than to be correct.” that really sums up the heart of this book!
if you’re into language & culture, you’ll probably enjoy it! but maybe go for the audiobook while multitasking 🎧 thanks to libro.fm for the audiobook (part of their influencer ALCs)!
the book’s strongest moments were when it explored how “like” functions as a way of validating your own feelings. a little offering of vulnerability that invites the other person to do the same. I also enjoyed the side tangents about other conversational fillers (like “hella”) and how language evolves within subcultures. but sometimes it felt like we were meandering without a clear destination. of course, in the end, it all circles back to misogyny (sigh). one line that stuck with me was: “it’s more important to be understood than to be correct.” that really sums up the heart of this book!
if you’re into language & culture, you’ll probably enjoy it! but maybe go for the audiobook while multitasking 🎧 thanks to libro.fm for the audiobook (part of their influencer ALCs)!
March 13, 2025
I’ll get straight to the chase: I was really looking forward to this book and ultimately did not like it.
The misogynistic hatred of the word “like” has always bothered me. I was hoping for a history & analysis of the word, its uses, and a rebuttal of common criticisms “like” faces.
At its best, the book did that. Every time I considered setting the book down for good, I decided to keep going thanks to an analysis of linguistic research, a critique of earlier waves of feminism, and interesting discussion of conveying feeling through “like”, etc.
But as I said - I did not like this book. For something that seems so research based, it’s undermined by the number of personal anecdotes & assertions.
The structure is also utterly nonsensical and disjointed. There’s a myriad of long winded digressions into Obama era politics, Ice Spice, cobra Kai, AI, Love is Blind, and so much more. These digressions add little (if anything), read like ads, and are overall incredibly confusing inclusions. These digressions, as well as the author’s humor, really did not click for me.
This could’ve (and should’ve) been a short article.
The misogynistic hatred of the word “like” has always bothered me. I was hoping for a history & analysis of the word, its uses, and a rebuttal of common criticisms “like” faces.
At its best, the book did that. Every time I considered setting the book down for good, I decided to keep going thanks to an analysis of linguistic research, a critique of earlier waves of feminism, and interesting discussion of conveying feeling through “like”, etc.
But as I said - I did not like this book. For something that seems so research based, it’s undermined by the number of personal anecdotes & assertions.
The structure is also utterly nonsensical and disjointed. There’s a myriad of long winded digressions into Obama era politics, Ice Spice, cobra Kai, AI, Love is Blind, and so much more. These digressions add little (if anything), read like ads, and are overall incredibly confusing inclusions. These digressions, as well as the author’s humor, really did not click for me.
This could’ve (and should’ve) been a short article.
September 29, 2025
If she mentioned Ice Spice one more time, I was taking off another star.
August 24, 2025
Reynolds – being American – has written a very U.S.-centric book in Like, and perhaps padded it out just a little too much with tangential sections (such as the extended overview of radical honesty). That said, the tangent about the history of the Valley Girl stereotype was right on point, and I loved the later section where Gentlemen Prefer Blondes by Anita Loos gets a shout-out. So, Like isn’t a perfect read, but it’s like, amazing to finally have an articulated defense of this unfairly maligned verbal habit.
My full review of Like is up now on Keeping Up With The Penguins.
My full review of Like is up now on Keeping Up With The Penguins.
April 1, 2025
It's like Candice Bushnell's The Anatomy of Melancholy.
The book is about the word "like," specifically in its form of a filler word. It is about filler words in general, but the book unmakes filler words as filler words in its analysis of the different connotations and shades of like in usage.
The book is concerned with gender, as the critiques of the use of the word like often have a gendered component, but also in politics, as critiques often have a political component, albeit a second order one. The paradox is that the most frequently critiqued for using the word like, young women, are also the engineers of linguistic meaning, setting the tone (literally, sometimes) for conversation throughout a culture.
My disappointment here is that the scope is limited to the usage of like as a filler. Like is a rich word for usage, including the term for romantic attraction and as the fundament on which all social media springs. The exception that proves the rule here is discussing earlier usages of the word like: the prior moral panics over agrammatical usage of like, which are now used today without blush from purists.
It is not academic, but it does not profess to be. It is a quick read, but dense in is areas of coverage. I liked it; while not novel, it provides a good grounding.
But...so...like...okay, so at one point, the book starts in on Marisa Tomei's Academy Award winning performance as Mona Lisa Vito in My Cousin Vinny. And while you should never explain the joke, the book explains the joke and how the joke works, which essentially mirrors much about the word like in its divergence between the content of speech and the verbal tics of speech. We should always be glad to explore anything about the exquisite piece cinema that is My Cousin Vinny. But this exploration highlights the metafictional turn, as the structure of the book operates in the form of the rebuttal to the complaint about the use of the word like.
This book is impossible to review, not because it is impossible to review, but because it is impossible to review. The acerbic critic in me would toss off how if the blog parts were left out, this would be term paper length, but that is wrong, not because it is wrong, but because it is wrong. The diversions are multiplicative, not subtractive. Often insightful, they are often not insightful for their connections to the specific material in the text but to the mise-en-scène of the book, literally so in terms of the structure of the writing on the page, but equally figuratively, or whatever writerly word you want to use to reflect that concept in written form. The text itself is an extended like. It is filler, but not in a way that would improve the sentiment by its removal. It works, not always, but often enough, and I ran out of proverbial tabs for the bits of sidelong insight that function wholly apart from but necessarily within the context of the thesis. Additionally, or alongside, or on top of, I will have zero surprise if the reviews skew based on the reviewer's age. The writing here has a generational architecture. You may feel put off by it but for some of us, but for me, this is cozy, so it may be that it is too similar to my own internality to function out of deep critical conserve, but this is a feature not a bug, and the sort of cool thing that words can do, all of which, again, works to reflect the light of the core, an inverted disco ball, the summary of madness, a roller coaster of a book. I like it.
My thanks to the author, Megan C. Reynolds, for writing the book and to the publisher, HarperOne, for making the ARC available to me.
The book is about the word "like," specifically in its form of a filler word. It is about filler words in general, but the book unmakes filler words as filler words in its analysis of the different connotations and shades of like in usage.
The book is concerned with gender, as the critiques of the use of the word like often have a gendered component, but also in politics, as critiques often have a political component, albeit a second order one. The paradox is that the most frequently critiqued for using the word like, young women, are also the engineers of linguistic meaning, setting the tone (literally, sometimes) for conversation throughout a culture.
My disappointment here is that the scope is limited to the usage of like as a filler. Like is a rich word for usage, including the term for romantic attraction and as the fundament on which all social media springs. The exception that proves the rule here is discussing earlier usages of the word like: the prior moral panics over agrammatical usage of like, which are now used today without blush from purists.
It is not academic, but it does not profess to be. It is a quick read, but dense in is areas of coverage. I liked it; while not novel, it provides a good grounding.
But...so...like...okay, so at one point, the book starts in on Marisa Tomei's Academy Award winning performance as Mona Lisa Vito in My Cousin Vinny. And while you should never explain the joke, the book explains the joke and how the joke works, which essentially mirrors much about the word like in its divergence between the content of speech and the verbal tics of speech. We should always be glad to explore anything about the exquisite piece cinema that is My Cousin Vinny. But this exploration highlights the metafictional turn, as the structure of the book operates in the form of the rebuttal to the complaint about the use of the word like.
This book is impossible to review, not because it is impossible to review, but because it is impossible to review. The acerbic critic in me would toss off how if the blog parts were left out, this would be term paper length, but that is wrong, not because it is wrong, but because it is wrong. The diversions are multiplicative, not subtractive. Often insightful, they are often not insightful for their connections to the specific material in the text but to the mise-en-scène of the book, literally so in terms of the structure of the writing on the page, but equally figuratively, or whatever writerly word you want to use to reflect that concept in written form. The text itself is an extended like. It is filler, but not in a way that would improve the sentiment by its removal. It works, not always, but often enough, and I ran out of proverbial tabs for the bits of sidelong insight that function wholly apart from but necessarily within the context of the thesis. Additionally, or alongside, or on top of, I will have zero surprise if the reviews skew based on the reviewer's age. The writing here has a generational architecture. You may feel put off by it but for some of us, but for me, this is cozy, so it may be that it is too similar to my own internality to function out of deep critical conserve, but this is a feature not a bug, and the sort of cool thing that words can do, all of which, again, works to reflect the light of the core, an inverted disco ball, the summary of madness, a roller coaster of a book. I like it.
My thanks to the author, Megan C. Reynolds, for writing the book and to the publisher, HarperOne, for making the ARC available to me.
Did not finish
January 23, 2026DNF at 8%
Intro didn’t convince me the author had much of substance to say on the topic. Already feeling repetitive.
Skimming some reviews didn’t persuade me otherwise.
1.23.26
Intro didn’t convince me the author had much of substance to say on the topic. Already feeling repetitive.
Skimming some reviews didn’t persuade me otherwise.
1.23.26
August 19, 2025
I‘ve read many popular language books and I rarely like them; but I also rarely dislike them as much as I dislike this book. This book is about „like“ only on the most superficial of levels. You get some observations (usually unsupported) per chapter. The rest is the author rambling about unrelated stuff. Example: „like“ telegraphs insecurity. Here is 10 pages on vulnerability and radical honesty, quoting dudes that gave TED talks, with the author‘s opinion sprinkled in. Or a story about how she interpreted some mediocre 80s movie. Wow, how relevant!
Special shoutout goes to the author‘s treatment of sources. She sometimes mentions that researchers have written papers on „like“ and that she has read these papers (at one point, she even complains about how exhausting that was), only to then cite none of them. Rather, she briefly quotes interviews she had with researchers; the things that do make the cut are usually pretty meaningless or trivial. The only written works she does cite are poplinguistics. Which makes sense; we should definitely prefer what Amanda Montell has to say to the opinions of actual researchers.
Special shoutout goes to the author‘s treatment of sources. She sometimes mentions that researchers have written papers on „like“ and that she has read these papers (at one point, she even complains about how exhausting that was), only to then cite none of them. Rather, she briefly quotes interviews she had with researchers; the things that do make the cut are usually pretty meaningless or trivial. The only written works she does cite are poplinguistics. Which makes sense; we should definitely prefer what Amanda Montell has to say to the opinions of actual researchers.
December 28, 2025
This book could have been an email.
November 19, 2025
I don’t know that Reynolds brings much new material to the table here in her musings on the word “like,” but I found it to be a quick and fairly enjoyable read. I appreciated the linguistic analysis and historical aspects, particularly her masculine counterexample of “dude,” but that was all relatively brief. Lots of personal anecdotes and summaries of movies, podcasts, and TikToks that I’m not sure lends much to her argument that we should just, like, not be so, like, misogynistic and, like, just freely use filler words because they actually, like, make us better communicators.
August 6, 2025
Oof. I normally don't write reviews like this, but seriously why was this book even written? Like has about two interesting things to say, which are repeated to the point of exhaustion through various semi-related concepts and an annoying amount of summaries of movies. The entire book basically comes down to this: the word "like" has garnered so much vitriol because of misogyny. That's about it! This actually isn't a new or even remotely fresh idea, yet somehow Reynolds made an entire book about it and padded it with anecdotes about awful Hinge dates that actually take away from the core of the thesis.
If you've never thought about how the hatred of slang and the use of words tends to skew towards older people and almost always has a misogynistic slant, you might find this book interesting. Anyone else who has been alive for more than 2 decades and has been paying attention to popular culture can probably skip this one.
If you've never thought about how the hatred of slang and the use of words tends to skew towards older people and almost always has a misogynistic slant, you might find this book interesting. Anyone else who has been alive for more than 2 decades and has been paying attention to popular culture can probably skip this one.
January 16, 2026
It's rare for me to dislike a book this much, especially non fiction. I don't take issue with the concept but my God, the tone annoyed the shit out of me. This may be my own fault.
I don't think I was a good audience for this book. For a start I already know too much about linguistics so wherever Reynolds referenced a more academic book or paper I wished I was reading that instead. Also it is SO American, which I should probably have expected but didn't. Having grown up in the era of Friends and Clueless when America was still cool, I see 'like' just as much a part of a Scottish person's vocabulary as an American's, whereas this book is just so incredibly centred on the American experience of the word. Which is fair enough for the author but very irritating for a non American reader.
The worst thing is the 'interludes'. Completely useless digressions to explain the plot of some shitty film or what happened on a reality show.
Ultimately I feel that Reynolds defense of 'like' is way over the top. Having done quite a lot of transcription in my time I know that almost everyone uses filler words, some more than others. 'Like' is extremely common and it's really not that big a deal. In the UK at least, I think accent comes with much more baggage.
I don't think I was a good audience for this book. For a start I already know too much about linguistics so wherever Reynolds referenced a more academic book or paper I wished I was reading that instead. Also it is SO American, which I should probably have expected but didn't. Having grown up in the era of Friends and Clueless when America was still cool, I see 'like' just as much a part of a Scottish person's vocabulary as an American's, whereas this book is just so incredibly centred on the American experience of the word. Which is fair enough for the author but very irritating for a non American reader.
The worst thing is the 'interludes'. Completely useless digressions to explain the plot of some shitty film or what happened on a reality show.
Ultimately I feel that Reynolds defense of 'like' is way over the top. Having done quite a lot of transcription in my time I know that almost everyone uses filler words, some more than others. 'Like' is extremely common and it's really not that big a deal. In the UK at least, I think accent comes with much more baggage.
June 19, 2025
I listen to a lot of podcasts. Nicole Wallace, MSNBC anchor, recently started a new podcast called "The Best People," in which she interviews some of the "smartest, funniest, and wisest people she knows." I listened to her recent interview with Rachel Maddow, and I couldn't finish it because Wallace said "like" so many times. The same with Fresh Air host Terry Gross, who says "like" and "umm" so much, it's a literal chore to keep listening.
I thought I would enjoy Megan C. Reynolds's book, but she obviously was only trying to justify her own love of the word "like." I am in the age group that she denigrates so much; she even finds a podcaster who agrees with her that the people who dislike overuse of the word "like" are mostly "old people." As a college-educated, former newspaper reporter and section editor who just happens to be over 60 years old, I found this very insulting.
Ms. Reynolds spends a lot of time talking about "influencers" (a "career" which I also find difficult to embrace) and celebrities (if you consider "Love Island" participants celebrities) and a very annoying amount of time talking about her childhood issues involving speaking Mandarin or not speaking Mandarin.
I make no apologies for being in the "old people" group, who, according to the author, are the ones who hate overuse of "like." I asked my neighborhood book club about this last night, and they all agreed with me that while "like" definitely has its place in language, it is the subsection of 20- and 30-somethings who use it in every sentence, who have turned the word into a vulgarity. To us "old people," the overuse of "like" invokes laziness, distraction and unprofessional behavior.
If this book had spent as much time considering both sides of the issue -- without her obvious bias -- I would not have judged it so harshly.
Thanks to NetGalley, the author and HarperCollins for the eARC and the opportunity to read and review this book.
I thought I would enjoy Megan C. Reynolds's book, but she obviously was only trying to justify her own love of the word "like." I am in the age group that she denigrates so much; she even finds a podcaster who agrees with her that the people who dislike overuse of the word "like" are mostly "old people." As a college-educated, former newspaper reporter and section editor who just happens to be over 60 years old, I found this very insulting.
Ms. Reynolds spends a lot of time talking about "influencers" (a "career" which I also find difficult to embrace) and celebrities (if you consider "Love Island" participants celebrities) and a very annoying amount of time talking about her childhood issues involving speaking Mandarin or not speaking Mandarin.
I make no apologies for being in the "old people" group, who, according to the author, are the ones who hate overuse of "like." I asked my neighborhood book club about this last night, and they all agreed with me that while "like" definitely has its place in language, it is the subsection of 20- and 30-somethings who use it in every sentence, who have turned the word into a vulgarity. To us "old people," the overuse of "like" invokes laziness, distraction and unprofessional behavior.
If this book had spent as much time considering both sides of the issue -- without her obvious bias -- I would not have judged it so harshly.
Thanks to NetGalley, the author and HarperCollins for the eARC and the opportunity to read and review this book.
August 24, 2025
Not a lot of history, more like a bunch of essays about the author's personal experiences with the word or, rather, her experiences being looked down upon as a woman who uses "like" and other filler words. Not to say that this isn't a topic worth talking about, but the title did lead me to believe that I was going to be reading a very different book. I don't suppose it helps that I didn't find the author very likable - every chapter started with promise but then would dissolve into her talking about reality shows, how much weed she has to smoke or eat to make it through her boring office job, the way that men on dating apps suck... I finished the book because it was short enough, but I do feel like I just read a bunch of Buzzfeed articles instead of a book.
August 4, 2025
I always think I’m going to dislike linguistic books, but I love ones like this. If you’re a fan of Amanda Montell, you’ll love this book from Megan C. Reynolds. There are far too many people who judge others by how they talk and what words they use. This book, along with others, remind me that it’s alright to not talk like an intellectual all the time, and that doesn’t mean people like us should be taken less seriously.
I especially enjoy the title. I say “like” as much as a teen girl from The Valley, and Reynolds explains how it’s a perfectly fine word to say. She explains how this word and many others that people deem less intelligent actually have a lot of meaning and nuance to them and help people express themselves.
As a YouTube creator, I regularly get comments about how I talk and phrase things, and books like this help me not care.
I especially enjoy the title. I say “like” as much as a teen girl from The Valley, and Reynolds explains how it’s a perfectly fine word to say. She explains how this word and many others that people deem less intelligent actually have a lot of meaning and nuance to them and help people express themselves.
As a YouTube creator, I regularly get comments about how I talk and phrase things, and books like this help me not care.
November 20, 2025
"Like" as a "filler word" seems like something that's been examined as long as I've been alive, so the idea behind this book already seems a little stale, but of course I'm always open to and interested in fresh takes. Certainly after 40+ years of scrutiny, a new book about this aspect of speech must bring something new and interesting to the table -- research, angles, insights, what have you. Not only does this book not really build upon this topic in any substantial way, but the fact that it takes up a whole book seems excessive. This is an essay at best. That's not to say the book didn't have its interesting moments, and I do tend to enjoy the voice of millennial authors, specifically of the generation's elders which I gathered Reynolds is. It entertained me at times, and even touched on related cultural elements, which if explored further may have made this a more rewarding read.
October 7, 2025
A fascinating look at the word “like” and an argument for being more accepting of the word as both a conjunction and a complete sentence by itself. An analysis of female speech and the way girls influence and drive changes in language. A rationale for filler words such as “like” and “literally” being catalysis for better communication.
Read
August 21, 2025strong start but it went totally off the rails. I had to stop when love island came up for some reason. painfully overt stretching of the material; maybe just enough for a great article but not for a book
July 21, 2025
Interesting!
September 19, 2025
I liked it until i didn’t
November 18, 2025
This book should have an index!
October 12, 2025
Based on the title I had really high hopes for this book, and there were good moments, but overall it was just a confused mess. I am not sure if Reynolds knew what book she was writing. Is this a linguistic history, a pop culture commentary, a feminist manifesto, a statement on politics, or a stream of conscious based on whatever she felt like talking about. Overall I just didn't get what Reynolds was trying to accomplish with this book (other than maybe her own version of Wordslut).
August 11, 2025
I borrowed this book from our library, but I didn’t (couldn't) finish it. I stopped around 70 pages into the book. Just reading all the passages with the obnoxious word “like” became intolerable. I hear that word way too many times while out in public, especially from young people (and many times in one sentence), but I’ve been hearing it more and more from older people, who probably acquired it when they were young people or by osmosis from young people.
I gave up on this book for another reason, too. While the author was pointing out all the egregious uses of “like”, she made numerous grammatical errors of her own. I found all the errors distracting while the author was expostulating on the grammatical quirks of “like”.
I was taught in grade school in the 60’s that “they”, “their”, and “them” are plurals. The author had many instances where a pronoun was in the plural but its antecedent was in the singular, so they did not agree, for example:
P11: “A polite person’s natural inclination is to adjust their manner…”
P31: “A tag question allows a speaker to make a declarative statement but also gives them…”
P32: “A tag question …the speaker to present as if they aren’t…”
P 60: “If you need to tell your partner how badly they made you feel…”
The fact that the author had plenty of examples in which a pronoun did agree with its antecedent in number indicated she knew what was correct, for example, p 31: “…for a woman to be taken seriously, she must…”. Why didn’t the author use “they” instead of “she” to be consistent with all the previous disagreements?
There were incorrect conversions of adjectives to their comparatives, for example:
P32: “more quaint” instead of “quainter”
P54: “more blunt” instead of “blunter”
I was taught in grade school, never to split an infinitive (and I purposely didn’t say “to never split an infinitive”). I know the rules have changed and have seen split infinitives in the prestigious New York Times, but split infinitives sound awful to me. This author had numerous examples of split infinitives:
P 59: “to actually like”
P 67: “to actually look”
I gave up on this book for another reason, too. While the author was pointing out all the egregious uses of “like”, she made numerous grammatical errors of her own. I found all the errors distracting while the author was expostulating on the grammatical quirks of “like”.
I was taught in grade school in the 60’s that “they”, “their”, and “them” are plurals. The author had many instances where a pronoun was in the plural but its antecedent was in the singular, so they did not agree, for example:
P11: “A polite person’s natural inclination is to adjust their manner…”
P31: “A tag question allows a speaker to make a declarative statement but also gives them…”
P32: “A tag question …the speaker to present as if they aren’t…”
P 60: “If you need to tell your partner how badly they made you feel…”
The fact that the author had plenty of examples in which a pronoun did agree with its antecedent in number indicated she knew what was correct, for example, p 31: “…for a woman to be taken seriously, she must…”. Why didn’t the author use “they” instead of “she” to be consistent with all the previous disagreements?
There were incorrect conversions of adjectives to their comparatives, for example:
P32: “more quaint” instead of “quainter”
P54: “more blunt” instead of “blunter”
I was taught in grade school, never to split an infinitive (and I purposely didn’t say “to never split an infinitive”). I know the rules have changed and have seen split infinitives in the prestigious New York Times, but split infinitives sound awful to me. This author had numerous examples of split infinitives:
P 59: “to actually like”
P 67: “to actually look”
May 5, 2025
Thank you to NetGalley and Harper Audio for the advanced listener’s copy of Like by Megan C. Reynolds.
As a teenage girl, I was constantly corrected for saying “like” too much, so I was instantly intrigued by this book. The premise of the book felt deeply personal. While I can’t say for sure, I suspect this book works best as an audiobook, where tone and pacing can add important nuance to the author's arguments.
I truly wanted to love this book. The author takes a thoughtful look at the societal biases that fuel the backlash against the word “like,” particularly its association with women, young people, and marginalized groups. She does a strong job transforming what many dismiss as a meaningless filler word into a lens for examining language, identity, and power dynamics in society.
That said, while the book is clearly well-researched and structured, I found some of the pop culture references, especially those tied closely to the author's millennial experiences less helpful. At times, they felt more distracting than insightful which often pulled focus from the linguistic insights.
Overall, Like is a fascinating read that gave me insight into the depth of a word we often overlook or ridicule.
As a teenage girl, I was constantly corrected for saying “like” too much, so I was instantly intrigued by this book. The premise of the book felt deeply personal. While I can’t say for sure, I suspect this book works best as an audiobook, where tone and pacing can add important nuance to the author's arguments.
I truly wanted to love this book. The author takes a thoughtful look at the societal biases that fuel the backlash against the word “like,” particularly its association with women, young people, and marginalized groups. She does a strong job transforming what many dismiss as a meaningless filler word into a lens for examining language, identity, and power dynamics in society.
That said, while the book is clearly well-researched and structured, I found some of the pop culture references, especially those tied closely to the author's millennial experiences less helpful. At times, they felt more distracting than insightful which often pulled focus from the linguistic insights.
Overall, Like is a fascinating read that gave me insight into the depth of a word we often overlook or ridicule.
September 19, 2025
There are parts of this book that are quite interesting, but they're harder to find amid pages-long digressions into the plots of movies like Legally Blonde and My Cousin Vinny, as well as the author's personal feelings on a wide variety of stuff not at all related to her subject matter. These are distracting to the point that I am reading through and constantly asking myself "How exactly does this relate to the word 'like' or related filler words?'" The actual meat of her book, when you can finally get to it, is interesting: how "like" has specific meanings depending on how you use it in a sentence, and the sociology of the word and how women are frequently chastised for using it, despite men tending to use it just as frequently. If you enjoyed this book, I highly recommend two books she references that get more specifically into the ever-changing world of language: Word by Word by Kory Stamper, and Because Internet by Gretchen McCulloch.
August 3, 2025
When reynolds was discussing the work 'like' her research, views, and information was spot on and thought-provoking. However, with such a specific topic, if she were to only discuss her word, a very short book this would have made. So, sadly, she branches out to include more information. This just makes the book unnecessarily longer as she uses tangential filler information to extend the read which is ironic since the word 'like' is used-a lot of the time-as a filler word itself. It was an interesting read, but it could have been half the size. I did appreciate the author reading the audio herself. I knew exactly how she intended the word 'like' to be heard in any given sentence throughout the entire book. And does she encourage her readers to change how we speak? Not at all! Our individual speech patterns are part of what makes each of us ourselves.
August 16, 2025
𝑳𝑰𝑲𝑬
𝑨 𝑯𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅'𝒔 𝑴𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝑯𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 (𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑴𝒊𝒔𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒐𝒅) 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝑴𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒏 𝑪. 𝑹𝒆𝒚𝒏𝒐𝒍𝒅𝒔 came out July 1st from @harperonebooks and I did not want to hear any kind of redemption for this word. I am one of the people who have tried (unsuccessfully) to abolish this word from my vocabulary, and yet as I began to listen, I had to ask myself why? Who decided the use of this as a filler word indicated ignorance? I'll let you guess. In following a bit of the wholly accessible history of filler words in general as well as this word in particular, I've realized I have become a word snob. I apologize. As the book says, and I will paraphrase, being understood is more important than being right. These rules are more often used to demean others by elevating the holder of such laws.
But let's not get too loose, shall we?!
𝑨 𝑯𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅'𝒔 𝑴𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝑯𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 (𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑴𝒊𝒔𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒐𝒅) 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝑴𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒏 𝑪. 𝑹𝒆𝒚𝒏𝒐𝒍𝒅𝒔 came out July 1st from @harperonebooks and I did not want to hear any kind of redemption for this word. I am one of the people who have tried (unsuccessfully) to abolish this word from my vocabulary, and yet as I began to listen, I had to ask myself why? Who decided the use of this as a filler word indicated ignorance? I'll let you guess. In following a bit of the wholly accessible history of filler words in general as well as this word in particular, I've realized I have become a word snob. I apologize. As the book says, and I will paraphrase, being understood is more important than being right. These rules are more often used to demean others by elevating the holder of such laws.
But let's not get too loose, shall we?!
July 25, 2025
Well... I love this type of book, the history of words. This is a little more informal than I am used to but reminds me of some of John McWhorter's work... like "Nine Nasty Words: English in the Gutter — Then, Now, and Forever". While the word "like" is not a nasty word, the author uses the F Word a number of times. She also delves into pop culture, and prejudice against women and their speech patterns. It is not overbearing, but a little defensive. Just so you know.
I'd be glad to read this book again. It was fun.
I'd be glad to read this book again. It was fun.
August 15, 2025
This little book is a well-researched study of the use of the word "like" in conversation as well as writing. The author feels that language/vocabulary changes are most often instigated by the slang use of words, especially by teen-age girls. Thus, the "valley-speak" use of "like." she makes a compelling case and then goes on to demonstrate how other forms of slang terminology make their way into the mainstream.
I felt (at age 75) that I was a bit too old and out of familiarity with teen talk to follow some of her examples since I haven't known any teen girls in many years.
It is an interesting study in language usage.
I felt (at age 75) that I was a bit too old and out of familiarity with teen talk to follow some of her examples since I haven't known any teen girls in many years.
It is an interesting study in language usage.
August 5, 2025
I remember using Norwegian for solving language puzzles while in college. The professor shared that the language didn't change so it made an excellent comparison for our work. I wonder if it has changed now with smart phones and social media.
Reynolds's book about like and other filler words kept me engaged. I do hear myself say like but I wonder how much I actually use it.
The thing that stuck out to me with "Valley Girl" was walking into a restroom at a nightclub and the line was long. I could see the stalls were open. The line was for the tiny little mirror.
Reynolds's book about like and other filler words kept me engaged. I do hear myself say like but I wonder how much I actually use it.
The thing that stuck out to me with "Valley Girl" was walking into a restroom at a nightclub and the line was long. I could see the stalls were open. The line was for the tiny little mirror.
July 9, 2025
More like a 3.5! This was an interesting, thought-provoking read, I just wish it dug further into how multifaceted “like” can be, beyond being a filler word. It mostly confirmed beliefs I already had, but I enjoyed chewing on why the word like has transformed under the pressure of misogynistic stereotypes. While this is a quick read, it also often felt overstuffed — some of the anecdotes felt a bit redundant.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews