51
   

What are your pet peeves re English usage?

 
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 03:05 pm
OMG!!! People are agreeing here! Red letter day!

Actually, I agree, too, that language is always evolving and it is what it is, meaning not bad or good. It just is.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 03:33 pm
But what about PC language.

It's all very well Andrew making a grand sounding generalisation like--

Quote:
The only way a language is destroyed is if people stop using it in favor of some other tongue. It is never destroyed


but PC language is doing exactly that. The process may be slow enough not to attract the notice of the unobservant but it is going forward.

My Auntie Phyllis didn't sweat. She perspired.

One might easily go on a wild imaginitive joy-ride thinking up future expressions for well known things the names of which are not PC. Some medical dictionaries have obviously been written tongue in cheek.

200 years of PC and a word like bottom might come to be such, evolve dare we say, as to render Shakespeare incomprehensible.

I once read a hilarious two page spread in VIZ, one of our Brit comics, featuring Kylie Minouge's bottom and how it came to be as it was as she kept thrusting it in our faces every chance she got thereby rendering it a matter of public interest. Whether it started with steak and kidney pudding, double chips, double peas, double bread and butter, with gravy, in a chip shop cafe on Blackpool front I can't remember but I can remember where it ended. Absolutely PC it was.

So I wouldn't be too complacent Andy.

They used to call it running the buggers across the river and now it's ethnic cleansing. Or economic relocation.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 04:46 pm
spendius wrote:
But what about PC language.

It's all very well Andrew making a grand sounding generalisation like--


Quote:
The only way a language is destroyed is if people stop using it in favor of some other tongue. It is never destroyed


That's not a generalization, Spendius, it's a truism.

spendius wrote:

... but PC language is doing exactly that. The process may be slow enough not to attract the notice of the unobservant but it is going forward.

My Auntie Phyllis didn't sweat. She perspired.


And those same choices are available today. In fact, you just used them.

spendius wrote:

One might easily go on a wild imaginitive joy-ride thinking up future expressions for well known things the names of which are not PC. Some medical dictionaries have obviously been written tongue in cheek.

200 years of PC and a word like bottom might come to be such, evolve dare we say, as to render Shakespeare incomprehensible.


These exceedingly minor changes that you're going on about have little to do with language change and though I can't state 100%, I'm quite sure that they are not what Andrew was talking about.

spendius wrote:

I once read a hilarious two page spread in VIZ, one of our Brit comics, featuring Kylie Minouge's bottom and how it came to be as it was as she kept thrusting it in our faces every chance she got thereby rendering it a matter of public interest. Whether it started with steak and kidney pudding, double chips, double peas, double bread and butter, with gravy, in a chip shop cafe on Blackpool front I can't remember but I can remember where it ended. Absolutely PC it was.

So I wouldn't be too complacent Andy.

They used to call it running the buggers across the river and now it's ethnic cleansing. Or economic relocation.


What is the point that you're trying to make here, Spendi?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 05:13 pm
How would I know?

It's nearly two bloody hours ago now.

What do you think was my point? You're the reader. Have you not heard of Derrida. The text is what the reader makes of it.

Like when they oow and aah over a fossil footprint.

I don't like peeves.

What about converting to PC explanations of ordinary things.

For example--the nature and function of pubic hair. Scientifically set forth.

So that Wiki in 2208 would have an proper explanation of this seemingly inexplicable phenomenom. Set out in a manner which is clear and concise and so that everyone can understand in biology lessons.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 07:52 pm
Spendi, by PC do you mean 'politically correct' or 'personal computer'? I'm not sure which of these is supposed to be wreaking the most damage on our beloved language.
0 Replies
 
loveislikearose3
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 09:19 pm
Merry Andrew wrote:

You say "old words are forgotten," Love. Well, of course. Language is constantly changing. In a very real sense, language is a living thing. Words die, just like people. There is no great tragedy in older words going out of use, being forgotten. Would you rather that we still used words like "forsooth" and "yclept" and "varlet"? Thankfuly, they all went by the wayside sometime during the Elizabethan era when the Queen's English was undergoing some significant changes, just as it is now.


Haha I was waiting for this. The famous "In goes the new out goes the old" or however it goes. Haha. But I didn't mean it in that way.
Of course I don't have anything against the way those scary words are not known to us anymore. That is understandable. Words change with ages. I get that. But they shouldn't be destroyed with ages. I don't mind the change in language, but I do mind the fact that it only worsens. Our vocabulary isn't increasing, though it should be. Well, some might say it is increasing, especially since we recently added a few words to our updated dictionaries, but I don't really count words like "bling" to be a new vocabulary word. Slang shouldn't be in dictionaries, though it is starting to be. Change is good. But only when it actually IS good and when it benefits the next generation.

JTT wrote:
Loveisarose3, this aspect of language that you've been discussing isn't even slang. Doesn't your name point to abuse of the language?


Actually, it is Loveislikearose3. And I don't understand how my name "points to abuse of the language"? Please explain.
And yeah, actually, I was discussing a simple version of slang and common (and annoying!) abbreviations.
But it's ok. I don't want to sound like a hypocrite, but even I write gonnas & wannas sometimes too. When texting, for example, to save time. But when abbreviated words are used excessively and it starts to annoy people, I think people should at least sometimes stop being lazy and write their words out. Gosh, I mean, it's not THAT hard.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 09:33 pm
loveislikearose3 wrote:


Slang shouldn't be in dictionaries, though it is starting to be. Change is good. But only when it actually IS good and when it benefits the next generation.


Dictionaries are catalogs for language, LiLaR. There's no reason that they can't include those words that are found in casual speech for speech is as much a part of language as is the written word.

Students of English, that is, ESLs/EFLs also need to know the meanings for a lot of these words. They buy dictionaries too.


JTT wrote:
Loveisarose3, this aspect of language that you've been discussing isn't even slang. Doesn't your name point to abuse of the language?


loveislikearose3 wrote:

Actually, it is Loveislikearose3. And I don't understand how my name "points to abuse of the language"? Please explain.
And yeah, actually, I was discussing a simple version of slang and common (and annoying!) abbreviations.
But it's ok. I don't want to sound like a hypocrite, but even I write gonnas & wannas sometimes too. When texting, for example, to save time. But when abbreviated words are used excessively and it starts to annoy people, I think people should at least sometimes stop being lazy and write their words out. Gosh, I mean, it's not THAT hard.


It was tongue in cheek, you not putting spaces between the words in your name.

One person's annoyance is another's no problema.
0 Replies
 
loveislikearose3
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 11:19 pm
JTT wrote:

Students of English, that is, ESLs/EFLs also need to know the meanings for a lot of these words. They buy dictionaries too.


You people are so predictable. Smile
I was just waiting for you to mention those who are learning English.
Haha. I thought about that myself. But I don't like to think that slang will become a permanent part of our language. It changes with age, and I can't wait until specific examples of annoying slang disappear in time and get replaced by something else. Therefore, I don't like the idea of slang recorded in dictionaries. That makes it permanent.

JTT wrote:
It was tongue in cheek, you not putting spaces between the words in your name.


It's a username. Who cares?

JTT wrote:
One person's annoyance is another's no problema.


Haha. Yeah, that's for sure.
0 Replies
 
loveislikearose3
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 11:20 pm
Oh, and don't comment on my last sentence. "For sure", although used as slang nowadays, I don't really mind. At least it doesn't mutilate words or abbreviate them until they're nonsense. Confused
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 04:26 am
Andy- I meant politically correct. I don't see any problem with personal computers that hasn't already existed in other communications.

If some people want to use computers to communicate in a manner they normally do in other forms of communication it does not mean that computers cannot be used to communicate in correct English.

Politically correct language is being used to comatose the population.

Stanley Cohen wrote in the appendix to Visions of Social Control-

Quote:
In the appendix to Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell explains the principles of 'Newspeak', 'Doublethink' and 'Ingsoc'. 'The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible'. By inventing new words, eliminating undesirable words and stripping remaining ones of unorthodox and secondary connotations, Newspeak functions 'not so much to express meanings as to destroy them.'


Secondary connotations are the source of humour which explains why PC people are humourless.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 09:30 am
Some new expressions are useful.

My credit card is "maxed out."

Brief, clear, and to the point.

And one syllable less than "overspent". And containing one more bit of information, too- the "out" part. i.e. not only overdrawn, but disabled.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 09:41 am
loveislikearose3 wrote:


You people are so predictable. Smile
I was just waiting for you to mention those who are learning English.
Haha. I thought about that myself. But I don't like to think that slang will become a permanent part of our language. It changes with age, and I can't wait until specific examples of annoying slang disappear in time and get replaced by something else. Therefore, I don't like the idea of slang recorded in dictionaries. That makes it permanent.


It really doesn't matter what you like, LilaR. You can see all around you that the whining does no good whatsoever. People will go on using language as it fits the situation despite the wailing of prescriptivists.

There are numerous examples of slang that have become commonplace. Others come and go, some are reinvented. You tip your hand when you show that you want certain slang replaced with something else. What? more slang, slang that you like?


JTT wrote:
It was tongue in cheek, you not putting spaces between the words in your name.


It's a username. Who cares?

One person's annoyance is another's no problema. But again, these little peeves make no difference to language.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 09:59 am
In BrE, it's no problemo.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2008 07:31 pm
@McTag,
No problemo.
0 Replies
 
loveislikearose3
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 01:50 am
@JTT,
JTT, oh, so now when a person states their opinion on something, it is calling whining? Heh. English language has really changed.
And by the way, if you haven't noticed, this thread's name asks for our pet peeves, which gives me every right to complain about specific modern aspects of the English language. Complaning does not neccessarily have to be whining. And I have every right to complain when I am asked about a pet peeve.
Prescriptivists? Hahahahaha...
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 12:11 am

I'm getting a little tired of pundits on TV saying "To be honest..." when they probably mean "to be frank...."

It means, I suppose, "everything I've said up to now has been dishonest, but this bit's not".

Which is not their intended meaning at all.
Clary
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 01:11 am
@McTag,
I took a friend to task about that only last year. It is irritating. He uses it to preface a disagreement or refusal like this:
Shall we watch Panorama?
To be honest, I don't find today's topic particularly interesting.

I want him to just say No, I'd rather not.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 04:44 am
@Clary,
Isn't the problem that if "to be honest" is not used by someone who habitually does so one might assume dishonesty? John Simpson, the BBC's World Affairs Editor, was always saying it but he's a brave man so I forgive him.
0 Replies
 
Wy
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 04:18 pm
@spendius,
Horses sweat. Men perspire. Ladies glow.
spendius
 
  3  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 05:35 pm
@Wy,
That's not a peeve surely?
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Drs. = female doctor? - Question by oristarA
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/24/2019 at 07:26:33