What are your pet peeves re English usage?

@McTag,

Quote:

Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike
All gone to look for America...

Speaking of which Stephen Fry has also done a tv series called 'Stephen Fry in America' (or something like that) and he showcases New Jersey and North Carolina in the same segment (a happy coincidence from my point of view). And in North Carolina, he goes to the tiny little alternative school I went to in the foothills of the Blue Ridge mountains of North Carolina - it's getting more and more FAMOUS! Stephen Fry really liked it too!

I'm afraid I have to weigh in with David on the media is/are issue.
Mostly because I would find myself saying, 'The media have blown this story way out of proportion' before I would say, 'The media has blown this story way out of proportion.'
That says to me that if I were to claim any sort of consistent behavior toward the word, I'd need to treat it as a plural noun- which it is.

But without the article, 'the' I treat it more as a singular word. When I say 'the media', I'm grouping various entities together in my head - print, video, radio....so I treat it like a plural.
On the other hand I do find myself saying things like, 'Media is intrusive in daily life'. I wouldn't say, 'Media are intrusive in daily life...'
Hmmm-
I guess that's why I don't understand how people can get peeved with other people who are, in fact, using a word correctly, even though it doesn't sound right to their particular ear.

Example: Spendius just used 'tedium' in a spot where I would have instinctively used 'tediousness'. Both are correct- so neither one is wrong. Just as if I said, 'He disrespected me.' It's not wrong - even though someone else might never say it.
So why do people feel the need to get peeved at choices people make even when they are, in fact, correct?

3 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

So why do people feel the need to get peeved at choices people make even when they are, in fact, correct?

It's not a 'need,' aidan. People get peeved because a peeve is a very personal dislike. It has nothing whatever to do with right or wrong, correct or erroneous. It's a 'gut feeling' sort of thing.

2 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Yes, but why dislike something that is someone's personal (but also legitimately correct) choice?

I see what you're saying Andrew - but I guess if we were to do a thread about words or phrases we feel peevish about being used at ALL- and not just incorrectly (by most standards- apart from JTT's Laughing

- little joke JTT)- the thread would be less about learning and more about venting.

I like the thread because it helps me look at grammatical alternatives and induces me to look at and understand WHY I say what I say - it's less useful to me if it's just going to have people saying, 'I don't like the word 'tremble' - I like it better when people say 'shake'.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Whether thay r correct
is disputed.

David

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

Yes, but why dislike something that is someone's personal (but also legitimately correct) choice?

Whether it is correct
is disputed.

If someone goes around saying that 6 + 7 = 14
and further, like JTT, mindlessly insists that it is correct,
I may well object anyway, regardless of the insistence.

David

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

What do the media do?

Plainly, it can be and often is used in the singular. It's a useful catch-all word.

cf "the press".
"The press is waiting to talk to you, Mr President."
Or are they waiting?

It depends whether we want to refer to the phenomenon as a collected group or as a group of discrete parts.

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

I'm afraid I have to weigh in with David on the media is/are issue.

You really don't seem to be offering much support for David's position, Aidan. David took the pedantic position that Spendi "should" only use a plural verb with 'media', when 'media' is a singular and a plural form.

Such is not the case, as you noted in this post.

Quote:

M-W
Main Entry: 2media
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural me·di·as
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: plural of medium
Date: 1923
1 : a medium of cultivation, conveyance, or expression; especially : medium 2b
2 a singular or plural in construction : mass media b plural : members of the mass media

usage The singular media and its plural medias seem to have originated in the field of advertising over 70 years ago; they are still so used without stigma in that specialized field. In most other applications media is used as a plural of medium. The popularity of the word in references to the agencies of mass communication is leading to the formation of a mass noun, construed as a singular <there's no basis for it. You know, the news media gets on to something " Edwin Meese 3d> <the media is less interested in the party's policies " James Lewis, Guardian Weekly>. This use is not as well established as the mass-noun use of data and is likely to incur criticism especially in writing.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/media

The example you came up with is interesting.

==============
UK region exact phrase search

Results 1 - 10 of about 44,400 English pages for "the media have".

Results 1 - 10 of about 30,500 English pages for "the media has"

+++++++++++++++++

USA region exact phrase search

Results 1 - 10 of about 647,000 English pages for "the media has"

Results 1 - 10 of about 448,000 English pages for "the media have".

2 Replies

@JTT,

Yep - that's why I could never be a prescriptivist - or would it be prescriptionist? Laughing

I'm all over the map with language - and I honestly do find all the little improvisations more interesting in the long run.

David - why do you keep doing the computation bit with me? I'm actually very good at adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing. But I have noticed the numbers in your examples keep getting larger. It started out with 2+ 2 = 5 and then 3+3 = 7 (when you were describing illogical reasoning). Now we're up to 6 +7 = 14.
Do you think these big numbers will confuse me or something?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Whether it is correct is disputed.

Only by idiots like you, David.

Quote:

If someone goes around saying that 6 + 7 = 14
and further, like JTT, mindlessly insists that it is correct,
I may well object anyway, regardless of the insistence.

I've never said that 6+7 equals 14, Om. Why would you state something so obviously inane? You've show that you possess little in the way of competence when it comes to language issues. You've now been caught in so many contradictions that your head must be swimming.

Stay away from questions of logic. It's not your long suit.

0 Replies

I have a buddy who is the nicest guy in the land, but uses “irregardless” frequently --at least twice a week. We’ve worked together about five years, though I’ve known him longer.

That I haven’t yet run screaming from the room, corrected him, or let on in any way that I find it cringe worthy is a testament to my stoic nature, but I find myself wavering. I sometimes daydream: “STOPITSTOPITSTOPIT!”

Moral support gratefully accepted.

1 Reply

@Joeblow,

joeblow, Here's the freedictionary definition and explanation for the word "irregardless" that I myself have used on occasion. It's a bad habit that's hard to remove from our vocabulary once used - like cocaine.

Quote:

ir·re·gard·less (r-gärdls)
adv. Nonstandard
Regardless.
[Probably blend of irrespective and regardless.]
Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

I'm all over the map with language - and I honestly do find all the little improvisations more interesting in the long run.

You're not all over the map, Aidan. And the little improvisations, well, those are actual rules of language. If they were improvisations, in the sense of personal idiosyncrasies, then they wouldn't be so commonplace across language.

You exhibit much too much common sense to ever be a prescriptivist. You seem to be lacking that essential trait that one needs to be a prescriptivist, a blind acceptance of dodgy "rules".

0 Replies

The thing that I can't quite understand is that there is widespread condemnation for these "errors" but the prescriptivists are given a free pass for all the nonsensical things that they've said about language over the centuries.

A kid could have sat, still could today, in a school grammar lesson in the USA and yelled out booooooo, Strunk & White; boooooo, "name any textbook" for most everything the teacher said.

I think your stoic nature is the best approach, Joe, 'cause it really ain't any worse than when people use 'cause or ain't or any number of other forms that are found in casual speech.

Quote:

M-W

irregardless

nonstandard : regardless
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

0 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Quote:

It's not a 'need,' aidan. People get peeved because a peeve is a very personal dislike. It has nothing whatever to do with right or wrong, correct or erroneous. It's a 'gut feeling' sort of thing.

Another one for the Dumb things that I wish I had never said list.

Let me get this straight; people have a right to their gut feelings about language but on all other issues, they have to be concerned about being factual and honest.

Now it's becoming a wee bit clearer why prescriptivists rarely make any sense.

2 Replies

@JTT,

No; I believe the only thing that's important about language is the ability to communicate what they mean regardless of how much they do not follow correct grammar.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Let me get this straight; people have a right to their gut feelings about language but on all other issues, they have to be concerned about being factual and honest.

Where the hell did I ever say that? Do you have cognitive problems, JTT? Do you honestly have difficulty in understanding simple everyday statements?

We are talking about factual matters here, i.e. people's "gut feelings", aka "pet peeves." There are no considerations of "right" and "wrong." I said that, you'll notice. Yet you insist on accusing me of saying that people "have a right to their gut feelings about language but...[not on other issues]." I never said a word about whether anybody has or does not have any rights on any issues whatever. Prescriptivism, hell. Just like you, I'm describing what is, not what is "right or "wrong."

1 Reply

@Merry Andrew,

Relax, Merry. By your own admission, you've been unclear on a number of subjects recently. I think, given that,that you could cut me a little slack here.

Quote:

We are talking about factual matters here, i.e. people's "gut feelings", aka "pet peeves." There are no considerations of "right" and "wrong." I said that, you'll notice. Yet you insist on accusing me of saying that people "have a right to their gut feelings about language but...[not on other issues]." I never said a word about whether anybody has or does not have any rights on any issues whatever. Prescriptivism, hell. Just like you, I'm describing what is, not what is "right or "wrong."

First, I haven't "insisted on accusing you of anything". I remarked on something you said that I perceived as, at best, misleading. Show me I was mistaken and I'll be more than happy to issue you an apology.

Okay, so just to clear things up.

You are of the opinion that people don't have a right to express falsehoods on any subject. A 'right', in the sense that they are to free to write/say what they want and that right includes that they will receive no criticism.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Too right: "like cocaine ." Laughing

~~~~
My son still insists on saying "I seen it." I heard his dad say it the other day. The penny dropped!
~~~~
I know I've complained here about it before, but I'm at the white knuckle stage with that one.

It's like nails on a black board.

Aieeeeeee.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

You really don't seem to be offering much support for David's position, Aidan. David took the pedantic position that Spendi "should" only use a plural verb with 'media', when 'media' is a singular and a plural form.

An interesting bitchy pair of sentences as ever a Chairman of a meeting to ratify the up-dated Bowling Club rules raised an eyebrow to as he rested his sore elbows on the table and gazed dolefully into the eyes of the only other bloke on the Committee during the discussion on Clause 4b in Part Two of R&Rs, as they are known everywhere where the chattering classes have clubs, ( a copy is on the wall beside the bar) specifically relating to ingress into the gate which leads to the path which goes past the Ladies Changing Room Windows and, the substantial matter, under which Head of Section the control of the key to the padlock on the gate should be vested

Notice how Dave is so callously and summarily dismissed for being wrong and pedantic with it. A view I share.

Becksie is painted as an inbetweener and her posts not even considered.

And I, spendi, is vindicated, validated and peer-reviewed.

Medias being the plural form.

To be strictly scientific I would define Media as that complex body of intertwined forces which places itself in between a transmitter and a receiver, usually for money and always affecting the communication. i.e. corrupting it. A force.

Like with "Woman" used as a singular to denote that force in the world to which we all owe so much and which deserves our unbounded admiration and respect.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Becksie is painted as an inbetweener and her posts not even considered.

Umm, what? I think my posts were considered- and rightly considered to be sort of on the fence. I take no offense at that - I'm always open to be persuaded. I recognize that about myself.

Quote:

And I, spendi, is vindicated, validated and peer-reviewed.

That's because you're the smartest and most special...we all recognize that.

Quote:

To be strictly scientific I would define Media as that complex body of intertwined forces which places itself in between a transmitter and a receiver, usually for money and always affecting the communication. i.e. corrupting it. A force.

See what I mean? Who else could have put it so succinctly and correctly?

Quote:

Like with "Woman" used as a singular to denote that force in the world to which we all owe so much and which deserves our unbounded admiration and respect.

And you got that right too - who else could have done that (as well as the above)?

0 Replies

What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know