Commonly F'd Up Phrases

First, as far as the “ask” gripe, it is perfectly understandable that people pronounce it the same as axe. The point of language is communication. That’s it. A well thought out language allows infinite expression with the greatest simplicity provided, and axe is significantly easier to pronounce than ask. You will notice the same difficulties with children, chilrun or chilluns.

Axe and ask are different enough in application that we are all quite capable of figuring out which meaning the person is expressing and so in many respects, it would make more sense to say axe. Does anyone know how knight was pronounced in the early days for god’s sake? As for its/it’s, they’re/their/there, if we are very capable of discerning which meaning is appropriate in the context of a conversation, why should we a spell a word that is contextually clear differently to indicate its meaning? If the problem were serious, the words would have different pronounciations.

Now for the “The children will bring their homework to class.” discussion. I think it’s Strunk and White who have another little book on grammar and as a seperate point, the phrase should really read “Children will bring homework to class.” Obviously you are not asking students to bring other student’s homework to class, so it is not necessary to include the article. In that vein, I have little tolerance for long-winded sentences. Get your point across.

There are hundreds of subtle things that you can ride people on such as different pronounciations of “the” with the short and long "e"s. There is a rule for when the long e should be used and short e, but they are impractical for everyday speech and they don’t add clarity to the language. That’s why the shall/will debate was finally dropped and will was adopted as the construction for all persons in the future. In the end though, proper English is still exactly what it used to be, a great divider.

English, the English we all (try) to speak now was once spoken in a very aloof and minute section of England. Thing was, they were the wealthy, and everyone wanted to imitate the classy, the wealthy. Things haven’t changed, proper English serves as a subtle moat between the well bred and the rest of the world. Why did no one complain about misuse of adverbs and adjectives: good/well, bad/badly. I consistently substitute the adjective for the adverb in passing conversation. Does this make me white trash?

Alas, what annoys me more than people’s failing grammar however are those who pretensiously correct it. In the first paragraph, it would not surprise me if someone got very excited to see “if the problem were” and thought, “shouldn’t it be ‘the problem was’” and jumped at the opportunity to “help” my grammar. Once a week it seems, someone discovers the English language’s limited use of the subjunctive.

And yes, “same difference” or “six of one, half a dozen of the other” make sense if you take a minute and think about it.

I just decided a long time ago not to waste energy worrying about it. If you understand me, and I understand you, then getting upset about semantics or grammar is a pointless exercise. I still notice mistakes, sometimes in my own writing, but there are far too many other things to worry about in my life to let it bother me.

Sexy J, do you not think we should seperate ourselves from the uneducated? I EXPECT people to educate themselves the best they can. Education does not equal wealth in this day and age. Everyone is responsible for their own education. Does that make me an asshole with a superiority complex? Maybe, but that’s just how it is.

I study Spanish, and I make it a point to learn and use the proper grammer. Why? Because I want to be considered intelligent when speaking to Spanish speakers. You’ll never hear me say Pa’ que to say Para que, even if it would be understood.

[quote]LocoComoUnZorro wrote:

I study Spanish, and I make it a point to learn and use the proper grammer. Why? Because I want to be considered intelligent when speaking to Spanish speakers. You’ll never hear me say Pa’ que to say Para que, even if it would be understood.[/quote]

I completely agree with your point, in that I also make the effort to be considered intelligent when I speak Spanish. However, pa’que judiciously used shows an even greater command of the language than always speaking correctly and formally.

I’ve picked up a lot of slang, expressions and alternative ways to say things that help me blend in and communicate to natives more as a native. For me, that’s more important than agreeing 100% with the Real Academia. But in a business setting, meeting people, job interviews and in general talking to people I don’t know very well, I always always use the best and most correct Spanish that I know.

Clearly, how to pronounce a word is a very local thing. Otherwise there would be no such thing as an “accent”. How many different “accents” do you figure exist in the English speaking world?

Sexy J,

While I highly approve of following the precepts of Strunk & White, it’s a grammar and style book, with the exhortation to brevity being one of the style points. Though we’d all be better off if everyone – and particularly my profession – followed their style recommendations more closely, I don’t get as worked up about matters of style as about grammatical rules.

But please keep fighting the good fight. =-)

I can’t believe I forgot this one…

How stupid does someone sound when they use per se in their sentence and they have no clue it means by itself.

My pet hate is rediculous.

One that irritates the hell out of me. Mostly because when it’s being used it is done in an attempt to sound intelligent and forceful. Ultimately, it’s just a misuse of the word…

Reiterate.

To iterate means to say or do something again.

To reiterate means to say or do something over again (sometimes with wearying effect).

In most cases, the word is used when the person is repeating themselves for the first time, but the use of reiterate here is wrong.

The second thing that drives me nuts is when people say “acrost” instead of across.

Greg

Oh and by the way, the “s” in Illinois is SILENT!!! Unless the state is trying to change it’s image and be cool by renaming itself to Illinoiz.

  1. INCORRECT “just desserts”
    CORRECT “just deserts”
    Spelled like the barren arid land, pronounced like the treat after dinner, but it has nothing to do with dessert. It means deserved punishments.

  2. INCORRECT “coming down the pipe”
    CORRECT “coming down the pike”
    This makes me want to slap people. Pike as in mountaintop.

  3. The difference between compiment and complement. Flattery vs. a complete set.

  4. One that I believe we have already lost “enormity” It is supposed to mean a very big BAD thing, not just something big. The enormity of WWII not the enormity of the wedding.

  5. For conorh, I am white and trying to make judicious use of rap slang. I have a question. “Baby mama (or momma)” as in “I love my baby mama, I’ll never let her go.” -DMX
    It is referring to a young mama? Or is it just dropping the 's as in “I love my baby’s mama.”

  6. Finally, a quote from Dr. Nick. “Inflammable means flammable? What a country!”

“Anywaysss” or “anywheresss”: these two really get me.

Also, “liberry”, instead of"library".

“Ambelance” rather than “ambulance”.

I didn’t get a chance to read the entire thread, so these ones might already be there, but after reading the first couple of pages I started to think about the ones that drive me…

Meeeeow

[quote]minilifter wrote:
4. One that I believe we have already lost “enormity” It is supposed to mean a very big BAD thing, not just something big. The enormity of WWII not the enormity of the wedding.
[/quote]

When the new pope was chosen, I read an Associated Press article that said the new pope was “faced with the enormity of his mission.” I proceeded to laugh out loud. But I guess pkdagreek would agree with that assessment…

In defence of ‘same difference’:

I always thought this was a deliberately silly phrase, usually meaning ‘who cares’ in response to equally silly pedantry.

For example:

‘He was hit by an 18-wheeler truck in a head-on collision and was killed instantly.’

‘No, it was a 17-wheeler.’

‘… same difference.’

The silliness being that the difference between two things is always the same, eg the difference between a 17-wheeler and an 18-wheeler is 1 wheel, and the other way round (between an 18-wheeler and a 17-wheeler) the difference is still 1 wheel.

It’s a kind of ‘meh, whatever’ response to someone pointing out an ultimately irrelevant detail or error.

[quote]LocoComoUnZorro wrote:
Sexy J, do you not think we should seperate ourselves from the uneducated? I EXPECT people to educate themselves the best they can. Education does not equal wealth in this day and age. Everyone is responsible for their own education. Does that make me an asshole with a superiority complex? Maybe, but that’s just how it is.

I study Spanish, and I make it a point to learn and use the proper grammer. Why? Because I want to be considered intelligent when speaking to Spanish speakers. You’ll never hear me say Pa’ que to say Para que, even if it would be understood.[/quote]

‘seperate’ is spelt ‘sepArate’

‘grammer’ is spelt ‘grammAr’

Come on, practise what you preach!

The most unique thing…

If it is unique, then there is only one of it, there is nothing else like it. If it is one of many, then it can be the most large, or the most frequently used. It cannot be the most unique. It either is unique or it is not, no qualifiers.

Loco, lets not even begin to talk about Spanish. I work in a Cuban restaurant (college isn’t 100% paid for) and if there is one language that has more dialects than speakers, it’s Spanish. If I tell one of the kitchen staff or one of the lawn maintenance guys at the owner’s house even “Tengo que cortar el prado…” they would look at me with utter confusion. “La yarda” is what they use, and you have the same joys with camion/truco and 95% of the english word sound-a-likes. Now surely you are not implying that the mexican kitchen and yardstaff do not speak spanish, and by using “prado” when no one will understand me constitutes good spanish speaking ability.

I wasn’t around when language was laid down, but my understanding is that it is to serve as a means of communication, not as a pissing contest. Your use of language is as good as your ability to express your meaning, not the grammar you use. Writing would be markedly stronger if people kept that in mind.

Things like “all intensive purposes” though are kind of humorous though.

[quote]gauss wrote:
LocoComoUnZorro wrote:
Sexy J, do you not think we should seperate ourselves from the uneducated? I EXPECT people to educate themselves the best they can. Education does not equal wealth in this day and age. Everyone is responsible for their own education. Does that make me an asshole with a superiority complex? Maybe, but that’s just how it is.

I study Spanish, and I make it a point to learn and use the proper grammer. Why? Because I want to be considered intelligent when speaking to Spanish speakers. You’ll never hear me say Pa’ que to say Para que, even if it would be understood.

‘seperate’ is spelt ‘sepArate’

‘grammer’ is spelt ‘grammAr’

Come on, practise what you preach!

[/quote]

Darn…

[quote]Sexy J wrote:
Loco, lets not even begin to talk about Spanish. I work in a Cuban restaurant (college isn’t 100% paid for) and if there is one language that has more dialects than speakers, it’s Spanish. If I tell one of the kitchen staff or one of the lawn maintenance guys at the owner’s house even “Tengo que cortar el prado…” they would look at me with utter confusion. “La yarda” is what they use, and you have the same joys with camion/truco and 95% of the english word sound-a-likes. Now surely you are not implying that the mexican kitchen and yardstaff do not speak spanish, and by using “prado” when no one will understand me constitutes good spanish speaking ability.

I wasn’t around when language was laid down, but my understanding is that it is to serve as a means of communication, not as a pissing contest. Your use of language is as good as your ability to express your meaning, not the grammar you use. Writing would be markedly stronger if people kept that in mind.

Things like “all intensive purposes” though are kind of humorous though.[/quote]

Grammar and vocabulary are not the same thing. I see your point though about the means of communication remark. But think about this: Italian has a very large number of dialects. This generally means that a person from one region of Italy would have much difficulty communicating with a person from another region. However, the educated Italians have learned and can understand standardized Italian (the Italian we would learn as foreigners). So, as it pertains to being able to communicate to the largest audience, the educated form is superior. It’s similar here in America. It’s not guaranteed that I would understand someone using a lot of slang, but you can be sure that the person speaking with slang will understand me perfectly if I speak normally.

But still, you’re right about Spanish having different words for things in different regions. This happens mostly with foods and animals.

Same deal with Chinese. There are 13 main dialects (I believe), the three biggest of which are Mandarin, Cantonese, and Shanghainese. Mandarin is called “putonghua” which means “the common tongue” or “the people’s tongue.” It is the standard form used in government, most movies and TV, business, etc. Most Chinese people can speak, or at least understand Mandarin. Not so with the other dialects. So if you’re going to try to communicate with a Chinese person, Mandarin is the most sure-fire way to go.

Of course, in places like Hong Kong you may see 2 people speaking 2 different dialects with each other–Cantonese, which is most common in Hong Kong, and Mandarin, of course. This happens in the movie “2046” by Wong Kar Wai. It’s kind of confusing for someone like me who can understand some Mandarin but zero Cantonese.