What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Although i would wish to assure you of my indifference to the manner in which anything "appears" to you, i would note that things are likely to have remarkably divergent appearances when viewed through a jaundiced eye.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

As i feel rather certain that you will point out that none of that is relevant to contemporary usage, and whether or not reticulate is to be considered a techincal term today.

VERSUS

Quote:

Setanta: There is not a hint of the dissembler in what i wrote, and i needn't look it up to understand the nature of that snotty remark . . .

Without any suggestion on my part that you were dissembling, you voluntarily came to the same conclusion yourself, Setanta. [See the parts in bold]

May I also offer that you can contradict yourself with a rapidity that is truly remarkable.

And you know what, I still like you! Go figure. Smile

0 Replies

Quote:

Setanta: As i have already mentioned, it is a place for people to vent their virtual spleens . . . note the specific term "pet peeve" . . . this thread is not about, and never has been about, the last word, the latest scientific assessment, of the language. It is as much a social venue, as it is anything else. Mostly, we like one another here, and are willing to listen, and to be patient of other's foibles.

Arms, fingers, head, nose, cheeks, ears ... yup, I'm a people. Smile

Last word, I fear not; we're at page, what?, 107, 108. And them pesky "scientific assessments", we don't want any of 'em gettin' in the way of our prejudices, nosireebob.

I must admit that this line of argument eludes me coming from a man who professes to be "well read". Really, truly, Setanta, you seem to have a penchant for making contradictory statements.

The following quote can be found at;

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=29365&start=110

Setanta:
"When you post crap, i will come along and observe that you have posted crap, as is my right, and one of the exercises in debate which one expects here."

The purpose of the History forum is all about facts and rational assessment but the English forum is for old wives tales and falsehoods. MAJOR Confused

0 Replies

JTT wrote:

Setanta wrote:
I rather despise "networking" as a verb--but so few people know what reticulate means, that i don't make an issue of it.

I'd say that most people eschew, excuse me, avoid the formal and the technical in favour of more everyday word choices when the situation is not one that is formal or technical.

And sometimes, more often than I would like, to add gravitas or even for less laudable reasons, the technician or expert (lawyer, doctor, etc) will use formal, technical or obscure terms when they could easily express themselves more clearly and more accessibly in plain English.

0 Replies

JTT wrote:

Setanta wrote:
As i feel rather certain that you will point out that none of that is relevant to contemporary usage, and whether or not reticulate is to be considered a techincal term today.

VERSUS

Quote:
Setanta: There is not a hint of the dissembler in what i wrote, and i needn't look it up to understand the nature of that snotty remark . . .

Without any suggestion on my part that you were dissembling, you voluntarily came to the same conclusion yourself, Setanta. [See the parts in bold]

May I also offer that you can contradict yourself with a rapidity that is truly remarkable.

And you know what, I still like you! Go figure.

Dissembling means to hide one's true feelings behind a false front, yet you continue to assert that i have done so here. I was then and i remain certain that you will continue to drone on about what is or is not current usage--so in what, precisely do you contend that i am dissembling? I have pointed out simply that you will do so, and so you have. In fact, this lastest attempt at a sally on your part suggests to me that you do not know how correctly to use the word dissemble.

Allow me to assure you that i also view with indifference the question of whether or not i have your regard or good opinion, or even whether or nor your response to me is congenial. Your current sad effort to contend that i am a dissembler, that i have not expressed my true feelings on the subject is not simply false (as in simply mistaken, i have no reason to call you a liar), it once again demonstrates that you don't understand this thread.

0 Replies

In respect to your last foray, JTT, if you are not able to understand that there can be a venue for the scholarly dissection of a subject, and as well, a venue for the casual discussion of one's feelings on a subject, then it is clear to me that you will never understand this thread.

The number of times which people pronounce crap ideas about history is a by-word with those who study the subject. Were i or anyone else here obsessed with rooting that out, i would have no time to post anything else, and would certainly have no opportunity for the harmless recreation afforded by a thread such as this.

Once again, this thread is a place for people to remark upon what they do not like in usage, what might irritate them. This thread is not and never has been billed as the final arbitration of acceptable usage. It is certainly in the English forum, it certainly is not offered as a guide to any student of English.

I was not alone in objecting to certain usages, however, you have chosen to make me your target. That's fine with me.

I cringe, too, when i hear someone use impact as a verb. I, too, find parenting a despicable sort of a verb. None of which is to say that such usages should not exist, or that they are incorrect, simply that they constitute a "pet peeve."

There is a popular locution of the young which has some currency, which i ordinarily would not use, but it is quite à propos here--get over yourself.

0 Replies

You know, i was going to suggest that our curmudgeon "wannabe" here go back to the beginning of the thread and read through it, to see that its character is casual and social . . .

. . . And i have been reading page after page, thoroughly enjoying the thread anew. It was, and continues to be, an interesting place to exchange thoughts, and sometimes quips, with our virtual friends. I highly recommend a "re-reading" of the thread, it wears very well.

0 Replies

I should have went to town

Anyways

yous

All are common colloquialisms here in Ontario.

0 Replies

Is that yous as in "yous guys?"

Years ago, when i first began to visit Ontario regularly, i found people's pronunciation odd, and some of the locutions amusing.

These days, i catch myself ending interrogative sentences with "eh?" . . . and so it goes . . .

0 Replies

Your zeal is burning brightly, Jonathan, and threatens us with a conflagration.

Let me point out, clearly this time, that you were being pedantic. To suggest that "reticulate" could be an alternative for "network" shows how out of touch with language you really are. [your gerund analysis helped a wee bit too]

I have not singled you out because you are Setanta; your ignorance with respect to language singles you out. You are now dissembling, continuing a process that started with your first reply to me.

That you have not entered any debate about specific language issues pretty well confirms the depth of your knowledge on language. You have not addressed one language point that I've raised.

Instead, you ramble on about your misguided notions of what is and what is not allowable in this language thread. To be frank, I'm afraid that I haven't seen much from you that would warrant the placement of just such a trust.

You've stated that you're not interested in what language scientists have to say but you love to offer up some little tidbits of knowledge on Samuel Johnson gleaned from a college course some forty years ago!

Quote:

Setanta:
Once again, this thread is a place for people to remark upon what they do not like in usage, what might irritate them. This thread is not and never has been billed as the final arbitration of acceptable usage. It is certainly in the English forum, it certainly is not offered as a guide to any student of English.

Quote:

From the Able2know Forum Index:
Brush up on usage tips for verbs, nouns, punctuation, etymology,slang and all the other components that make up the English language. ESL teachers are on standby to answer all your questions on the English language. We love answering word origin questions. Our etymologists are waiting to answer your questions.

Management might just disagree with you, Setanta. Care to give us your ESL teaching resume.

0 Replies

JTT

The "objectives" of this forum, if taken literally, would prevent the majority of threads from being started, let alone continued.

Of course this thread should exist in the English forum and we, the participants, are under no obligation to offer only those views of the various forms of the English language which are codified by ESL or any other official institute.

I am with Setanta on this point and on his assessment of the tone of the thread.

KP

0 Replies

You're like a dog bully-ragging an old shoe, aren't you, Bubba.

Your obsession shows through with your false claim that i had suggested reticulate as an alternative for networking. I only observed that i do not like the latter, while understanding that the former has fallen into disuse. But you can't let it go, because it means so much to you to prove that you are right, and that i am wrong. OK, you're right (invariably) and i am wrong (always)--now you can sleep the sleep of the just.

I do not deny that i used the term gerund when in fact "seeing" was not being used as a noun--so i was wrong. Which is not at all to say, as you attempted to do, that i was knowingly retailing a falsehood.

I have no particular credentials for English as a second language--i do, however, have some experience of it. When i was employed at the University of Illinois, i volunteered to assist the people in ESL, especially after the Mariel boat-lift, when we were flooded with Cubans badly in need of the instruction.

Management have not been so offended as you apparently, they have never contacted me on the subject.

Suggesting that you are an obsessive twit would be a violation of the terms of service, so i would never, of course, do that. Loon might be a more appropriate term, but as that species of waterfowl is native to North America, and you may not be acquainted with the singular trait of the loon which has lead to the use of the word as a pejorative, that effort might be wasted.

0 Replies

Thank you, KP, for your kind remarks.

I really should see about making arrangements to try your bangers and mash . . .

0 Replies

Yes, correct Setanta, yous guys.

0 Replies

You know, i was unaware of that locution in Ontario . . . it is, or once was, quite common in the New York-New Jersey area. I remember hearing it when is was just a lad visiting my relatives in the Bronx . . .

0 Replies

Also, "do any of yous want a drink?"

0 Replies

Ah, well, there you have it . . . i no longer take strong drink, so i've not been down to the bar where i might have heard that . . . guess i'll have a cuppa coffee an' think about that, eh?

0 Replies

I also hear this often at fast food counters
(another pet peeve):

"May I get a cuppa coffee," instead of "May I have a cuppa coffee."

Maybe I should just chill and stay home!

0 Replies

I always use "may," but then, i had good manners inculcated, if necessary through the medium of the back of my grandmother's hand, from a very early age.

0 Replies

Too bad Coffee Time and Tim Horton's don't deliver, eh?

0 Replies

What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know