How To Understand Why Government Offices Should Probably Stop Using “Cum” in Event Titles
Government offices, schools, cooperatives, and formal institutions in the Philippines still frequently use event titles such as:
- “Seminar cum Workshop”
- “Orientation cum Team Building”
- “Consultation cum Onboarding”
At first glance, the word cum appears formal, intellectual, and institutionally polished. It carries the aura of old administrative English — the kind often associated with academia, legal writing, or traditional government correspondence.
But there is a growing problem with its continued use in modern public communication:
Most people no longer understand how the word is supposed to be pronounced.
And once spoken aloud in public settings, it can unintentionally create confusion, distraction, or awkwardness.
This is not necessarily because the word is incorrect.
It is because language evolves — and public interpretation evolves with it.
This article is not directed at any particular official, office, or institution.
It is a communication and drafting analysis about why many organizations may need to reconsider the continued use of “cum” in public-facing event titles.
If you are new to this kind of systems-based communication analysis, you may also read my earlier article, Start Here: Legislative Systems and Workflow Guide.
What does “cum” actually mean?
The word cum comes from Latin and traditionally means:
- “with”
- “combined with”
- “together with”
In formal English usage, it evolved into a connector indicating dual purpose or combined function.
Examples include:
- “writer-cum-editor”
- “bedroom-cum-office”
- “restaurant-cum-gallery”
Thus:
“Public Consultation cum Onboarding”
simply means:
“Public Consultation combined with Onboarding.”
Technically speaking, the usage is valid.
How is “cum” properly pronounced?
In Classical Latin, “cum” is pronounced:
“koom”
IPA: /kum/
The “c” is pronounced as a hard “k,” while the “u” sounds like “oo” in “food.”
This is similar to how the word survives in academic honors such as:
- “magna cum laude”
- “summa cum laude”
However, outside academic settings, many people instinctively pronounce “cum” according to modern English phonetics:
“come”
That difference in pronunciation is where communication problems begin.
Need clearer and more defensible institutional writing?
I help prepare ordinances, resolutions, committee reports, memoranda, and professional documents with clearer structure, cleaner wording, and implementation-ready language.
Precision is not cosmetic. It protects the institution.
Why the word sounds awkward in modern public settings
Over time, the word cum developed another meaning in modern English slang — one that is vulgar and now culturally dominant in many online and media environments.
As a result, contemporary audiences often no longer process the word primarily through its Latin meaning.
Instead, they associate it with its modern slang usage first.
This creates an unfortunate communication problem:
Even when the word is being used correctly in a formal institutional sense, audiences may still perceive it as unintentionally funny, outdated, or awkward once spoken aloud.
This issue becomes more noticeable in:
- public events;
- seminars;
- consultations;
- orientations;
- government ceremonies; and
- formal public announcements.
A word that requires explanation, pronunciation correction, or audience mental adjustment may no longer be serving its practical purpose.
This is not limited to event titles alone. Even procedural and institutional terminology can create long-term confusion when words are used loosely or without structural clarity. I discussed a related issue involving legislative terminology and institutional interpretation in my earlier discussion on Pro Tempore terminology and legislative structure.
The bigger issue is institutional communication
The deeper issue is not the Latin word itself.
The issue is institutional communication culture.
Many organizations still favor language that sounds:
- older;
- deeper;
- more ceremonial; or
- more “official.”
This is why formal documents sometimes prefer:
- “utilize” instead of “use”;
- “herewith” instead of “attached”;
- “pursuant to” instead of “under”; and
- “cum” instead of “and.”
But effective communication is not about sounding intellectually complex.
It is about immediate public understanding.
A word that requires explanation, pronunciation correction, or audience mental adjustment may no longer be serving its practical purpose.
Want a clearer system for institutional writing?
I created professional LGU-focused templates and workflow tools designed to improve clarity, structure, and defensibility in official documents.
Good drafting reduces future friction.
Why simpler alternatives work better
In modern public-facing communication, replacing “cum” is often the better editorial choice.
Instead of:
“Public Consultation cum Onboarding”
organizations can simply use:
- “Public Consultation and Onboarding”
- “Public Consultation with Onboarding”
- “Public Consultation and Orientation”
- “Integrated Public Consultation and Onboarding”
These alternatives:
- sound more natural;
- improve readability;
- remove pronunciation ambiguity;
- avoid unintended humor; and
- communicate more directly to the public.
Most importantly:
They require no explanation.
Technical correctness is not always communication effectiveness
One of the most important lessons in institutional writing is this:
A phrase can be:
- grammatically correct;
- historically valid;
- professionally accepted; and
- still be ineffective communication.
That distinction matters.
Because communication is not judged solely by correctness.
It is judged by reception.
If audiences become distracted by a word instead of understanding the message itself, then the communication has already lost efficiency.
Why this matters in government communication
Government communication carries a higher standard because it addresses the public directly.
Every title, memorandum, announcement, and event label contributes to:
- accessibility;
- clarity;
- professionalism; and
- public trust.
Using clearer language is not “less formal.”
In many cases, it is actually more professional because it prioritizes public comprehension over institutional tradition.
This is especially important today, where communication competes with:
- short attention spans;
- internet culture;
- rapid information flow; and
- evolving language norms.
Precision is part of institutional protection
A small wording choice may seem harmless during drafting.
But once language enters public communication, interpretation matters as much as technical correctness.
That is why institutional writing should not merely ask:
“Is this technically acceptable?”
The better question is:
“Will this communicate clearly and professionally to the public without unnecessary distraction?”
In many cases, replacing complicated or outdated wording with simpler alternatives is not a reduction in professionalism.
It is an improvement in communication discipline.
Precision protects the message.
Precision protects the institution.
Clear institutional communication is part of institutional protection.
Language that creates confusion, ambiguity, or unintended distraction weakens the message before implementation even begins.
Sometimes the most professional wording is simply the clearest one.