What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Actually, I've no time to think about that: I'm totally occupied playing merrily with my happy-go-around :wink:

0 Replies

No, seriously I do think, merry goes with Christmas .... and the month May - "merry month of May".

So it is perhaps more Christianity related and 'happy' is more secular?

0 Replies

I think "merry" is more pagan.

Christians don't enjoy themselves much, in my view...at least the Scottish ones don't. :wink:

Oh dear, I'm getting into hot water here.

0 Replies

I have a peeve on a similar touchy subject, which may only apply in Britain. When did the word RELIGIOUS get ousted by FAITH in such phrases as religious meetings, religion-based schools etc.

I have faith - trust - in humanity, in life, in many things, but I have no religion (<religio = I bind). Appropriation of this word by the religious lobby is like the narrowing in use of gay by the homosexual community. It devalues, narrows, the meaning of a good and useful word.

0 Replies

Well that's interesting, and I concur. I feel, though, while we may deplore some changes and think them unneccessary and even retrograde (and there are many examples of this in my opinion) change will continue.
I daresay the pace of that change is nowadays faster, with the pace of modern life and the frenzy of the meeja to find new ways of saying things.

And another thing: (thought of yesterday)

Can you say, without recourse to a dictionary, if there is a difference in meaning between 'repel' and 'repulse'?
Or, between 'repellent' and 'repulsive'?

0 Replies

Of course what you say in your first paragraph is true and JTT will reiterate it undoubtedly. That's why it's a peeve!

Can't for the moment think of any reason for the meanings of repel and repulse to be different, but usage differs, you repel an unwanted overture but the enemy can be repulsed. I think repellent and repulsive are used interchangeably. Are you about to prove me wrong?

0 Replies

No, but I had to look it up first....just wondered.

0 Replies

I find some repellents repulsive but not all...

0 Replies

Quote:

Clary: I think repellent and repulsive are used interchangeably.

No, they're not, Clary.

mosquito repellent

*mosquito repulsive*

Smile

0 Replies

Although repel and repulse are not to be taken as synonymous in all situations, Clary has a good point, although she perhaps did not realize it, in its military usage. There is no distinction worth making between repel and repulse as used in military jargon.

0 Replies

Clary wrote:

I have faith - trust - in humanity, in life, in many things, but I have no religion (<religio = I bind). Appropriation of this word by the religious lobby is like the narrowing in use of gay by the homosexual community. It devalues, narrows, the meaning of a good and useful word.

It seems puzzling, Clary, to suggest that when a new meaning for a word is added to English, it "narrows".

Have you ever looked at 'get'? How many entries are there in a decent dictionary for that word? New 'get' meanings are added, not infrequently and I've never seen nor felt that any of the other meanings are in any way compromised.

Etymology ain't my bag [hey, stop using 'bag' like that Smile

] but it seems 'gay' has a longer history than many imagine, moi included.

Quote:

"OK, so gay was definitely in use in the 1920s, and perhaps earlier, ... "
http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorg.htm

0 Replies

hi

can someone help me??? translate the following from english to latin:

Knowing love to me it will be mistaken for something else.

sarah

0 Replies

sarah,

if you post your question here, your odds of getting an answer will improve drastically...

welcome to A2k Smile

0 Replies

I think that Clary is right that the word 'gay' is now confined to one meaning where it used to be used in many senses. In that sense it has narrowed.
It is a different point from that of 'faith' - which is appropriation of a 'good' word with positive connotations by a politically correct government, for their own purposes. Shades of 1984, I'm afraid.

0 Replies

Yeah that's right!

0 Replies

Shorthand is a major pet peeve of mine. I hate shorthand. I even text message people using complete words- sure, I had to use the fasttext.t9.com tutorial to learn how to do it faster but for me it was well worth it.

0 Replies

The Pen is wrote:

I think that Clary is right that the word 'gay' is now confined to one meaning where it used to be used in many senses. In that sense it has narrowed.

In that very very narrow sense, Clary was right, except that that's not the sense that Clary was suggesting. She was suggesting that there is something untoward about shifts in language and vocabulary; that there's something amiss simply because a personal favorite has fallen out of favor/use.

{I bear no personal ill will towards Clary}

That's not how language works and it's naive to think it does or should work this way. Some meanings 1) become passe, some are 2) lost completely, some are 3) resurrected but none are subject to the personal whims of individual speakers.

When we look to the facts, we find that 'gay' in the sexual sense has quite a long history, certainly much longer than Clary, most of us for that matter. Were the homosexuals of the 1930s screaming about their word not getting the respect it was due?

Language is being enriched daily with old words receiving new meanings, some completely new words [though not as much] being coined. This notion that we are losing something because a word falls out of use is simply a canard.

Clary can continue to use 'gay' in the happy sense all she likes and the likelihood that someone will confuse the two is virtually zero.

It is a different point from that of 'faith' - which is appropriation of a 'good' word with positive connotations by a politically correct government, for their own purposes. Shades of 1984, I'm afraid.

I'm not trying to be snide, but please, Sir or Madam, what could possibly be wrong with anyone using language "for their own purposes"?

If we didn't/couldn't do that, we wouldn't have the pleasure of reading each other's postings. Think about it.

0 Replies

Clary has an excellent point. The word faith has been appropriate by right-wingnut fundy theists to the point at which all other meanings of the word are in danger of being driven so far into obscurity as to be lost altogether. Her example of the word gay is very much to the point--all meanings of the word gay other than homosexual have been so obscured as to have been lost. Use the word gay in today's world and it means to your interlocutors only homosexual. Use it correctly in any context relying upon another meaning, and you'll get blank looks or stupid sniggering. I had not thought about it, but i understand perfectly her point about the word faith going the same way.

What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know