What are your pet peeves re English usage?

JTT wrote:

Actually, I just went back and had a look at your preferences, Virago. Not a one, wait, let me double check ..., ..., ..., ..., I'm back, right, where were we, oh yes, not a one finds a scintilla of support within knowlegeable language circles.

You could not possibly have "gone back and had a look at [her] preferences" because the post which you have quoted is the first she made at this site. Therefore, you have indulged, to use a term you like to sling around wantonly, in a falsehood. In short, you lied.

That was as clear in my first response as it is in this one. However, there i exercised some discretion so as to be less offensive. However, as it appears that your reading comprehension skills do not rise to the level of your compulsion for invective, i've felt it necessary to repeat the statement in plain language.

0 Replies

Letty wrote:

Hmmm. I read the origin of the Specious once. If I recall correctly, it was "for the birds".

I know longer have pet birds, however. Sorry, carry on with the argument.

That assessment will do in a finch.

0 Replies

0 Replies

Quote:

Setanta:
You could not possibly have "gone back and had a look at [her] preferences" because the post which you have quoted is the first she made at this site.

Something's amiss, Setanta. The posting that I referred to was Post 1290324; Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 12:38PM. It was not the one that was quoted in my last response to Virago.

Here is the one I was referring to, in its entirety;

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Virago
Newbie

Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 26

Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 12:38 pm Post: 1290324 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I usually lurk, but I was really motivated to post to this!

One thing I cannot stand to hear is someone using "rech" (pronounced the same as wretch) for the past tense of reach. "I rech for the jar." I actually asked someone once if he wanted to have it in his hand, or if he wanted to throw up on it.

Another thing I don't like to hear is temperature in place of fever. "I'm feeling sick. I think I have a temperature." Well, I should hope that you have a temperature. Perhaps you also have a fever!

This one is a bit nit picky, but I prefer not to hear the phrase "Have your cake and eat it too." This is supposed to mean having it both ways or having it all! To have your cake and eat it is no big deal. People do it all the time. Try eating your cake and having it too. Now that's having it all.

This one really bugs me. "I could care less." This implies that you do care some. If you could care less then you do care a little bit. It should read "I couldn't care less."

And finally, my biggest peeve, the overuse of the word "literally". People incorrectly use "literally" when they are trying to impress upon you the degree to which they are affected by something. Literal means that something is exactly as stated. So, when someone says to me "It literally made my skin crawl" or "My eyes literally popped out of my head" I get a mental picture that I just don't want to have.

Virago

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

0 Replies

As you had not been more specific, i had taken your comment to the effect that you had "gone back" to refer to earlier posts of Virago, of which there were none, that post having been her first.

Therefore, i withdraw my allegation that you lied. It seems that as you have decided to jump on Virago for a few stray remarks used as examples in an excellently expressed objection to your condescending and didactic tone in this thread, which she has correctly recognized as a relaxed and social thread which does not purport to be the final word on English usage--that you are far sillier than i had previously imagined.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

As you had not been more specific, i had taken your comment to the effect that you had "gone back" to refer to earlier posts of Virago, of which there were none, that post having been her first.

Therefore, i withdraw my allegation that you lied. It seems that as you have decided to jump on Virago for a few stray remarks used as examples in an excellently expressed objection to your condescending and didactic tone in this thread, which she has correctly recognized as a relaxed and social thread which does not purport to be the final word on English usage--that you are far sillier than i had previously imagined.

I acept your apology. You have to learn not to jump the gun, laddie. Research your topic, make sure you understand what is being stated; don't jump to conclusions.

As regards my last exchange with Virago, I have merely pointed out that the argument was a vacuous one. Evidently, you thought it was excellent. Refer back to my first paragraph.

You may now have the final word on this much over discussed topic. Further comments from me will address language issues.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Letty wrote:
Hmmm. I read the origin of the Specious once. If I recall correctly, it was "for the birds".

I know longer have pet birds, however. Sorry, carry on with the argument.

That assessment will do in a finch.

Hey, is it my tern now? Bird puns, what larks!!

0 Replies

Don't you start preying upon this thread, Clary . . . i'm not fooled, i see the thrusht of your intentions . . .

0 Replies

JTT wrote:

This one really bugs me. "I could care less." This implies that you do care some. If you could care less then you do care a little bit. It should read "I couldn't care less."

I could care less about this one of your pet peeves. I could care less, but I won't. Laughing

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Don't you start preying upon this thread, Clary . . . i'm not fooled, i see the thrusht of your intentions . . .

Robin me of my bit of fun? Great bustard.

0 Replies

Your linguistic condortions don't fool me, Miss Clary, i know you're just puffin up yer ego . . .

0 Replies

Whilst.

Still hate it.

Sounds "uppity" to my Ottawa Valley ears. I try not to let it get to me, but I have difficulty listening to people who use "whilst".

0 Replies

I heard a debate by politicians and journalists on the radio today, and someone had referred to someone else's views as "repellent".

Should that be "repugnant"? I haven't looked in the good book yet for exact meanings, or meanings which were more-or-less exact when my best dictionary was published, but I would plump for "repugnant" and leave "repellent" for silicone sprays and anti-insect preparations.

0 Replies

hiya jtt tx 4 the lnx Smile

i gotta question 4 u

my dads gfriend shes a real stuckup b1ch n i tell ya wen she opens her mouth i wanna stick my fist right down it.

ne way i saw in one of them lnx u give me:

/As to 'between you and me' and 'between you and I', descriptivists would note that both are used by educated speakers, though the latter seldom appears in edited writing. Prescriptivists would argue that, despite educated usage, pronouns should have objective forms after prepositions ("Give it to me/us/them"); thus, only 'between you and me' is correct. /

now hatetheb1ch she sez stuff like /btwn you n i / n it drives me nutz coz it sounds so stuckup n british

well wat i wanna know is sounds 2 me like htb got it wrong n it shd be liek the man sez here /only 'between you and me' is correct. /

know wat im saying jtt am i right or am i right? Smile

phil

0 Replies

If she is using phrases like "between you and I" it sounds to me as if she is trying to build bridges and foster bonds of trust and fellowship between you and all you want to do is stick your fist down her throat- well, that hardly sounds like an appropriate response.
Try to see past the stuck-up britishness to the caring woman beyond.

0 Replies

PhilAster;
Mi yr spelnig s uneak

0 Replies

hey no offense intended mct

wen i say british i dont mean english Smile

yeah i know bout bridges n all but u only gotta know her *sheesh*

sides she dont say it 2 me she sez it 2 all her friends on the phone

ne way tx bro real nice of u 2 take the time

hey thr neologist wats wrong w/my spelnig Smile

just saving space

phil

0 Replies

PhilAster; Yr spelnig rminz me f war I got mi EDGECAYSHUN

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

JTT wrote:

This one really bugs me. "I could care less." This implies that you do care some. If you could care less then you do care a little bit. It should read "I couldn't care less."

I could care less about this one of your pet peeves. I could care less, but I won't.

No, Neologist, I didn't write what you said I wrote. Please read more carefully.

0 Replies

The problem with your spelling, PhilAster, isn't that it's somehow "wrong." The problem is that for those us who are of a certain age and unused to that kind of phonetics, it's just confusing as hell. Spelling phonetically like that is supposed to make it faster and easier to read. Why waste letters writing "you" when a simple "u" has the same pronunciation, right? Well, not quite. If the spelling were truly phonetic, the "u" would be pronounced "oo." I really have to read your posts extra carefully to try and understand what it is you're actually trying to say. It took me forever to figger out that "ne" stands for "any." So, for some of us, it slows things down instead of speeding them up. Now, it's perfectly possible, of course, that within a couple of generations everyone will be so into sending text messages on their mobile phones that this alternate spelling will be immediately comprehensible to everyone. (I'm glad I won't be around when it becomes commonplace.) But until then, we ancients will just have to struggle along and try to get the gist out of what, at first glance, appears to be pure gibberish.

0 Replies

What are your pet peeves re English usage?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know