Irritating words

[mrblanche]

Originally Posted by Minka

http://www.englishforums.com/English...krgnn/post.htm

Hooey. The discussion there is whether grammar (or a dictionary) is descriptive or prescriptive. Most dictionaries fall in the former category, at least in English. They tell what is in current use.

A grammar book, on the other hand, is the latter. It tells us what is established correct usage. Why? Because we want those who are not necessarily part of our local or regional culture to be able to decipher what it is we're writing about. Why teach grammar, unless there are accepted rules?

So, I agree with H. Beam Piper: Many of the ills of our modern society can be traced back to grammar teachers who let incorrect grammar and spelling slide.

 

[kittkatt]

Another thing regarding using proper grammar that really bugs me (okay, I know we're talking about specific words here and I'm getting off topic

), but I can't stand double negatives - especially when the word "ain't" is also used - such as, "I ain't go no money" or "I ain't got nothing to say"

-- when it should be, "I don't have any money" or "I don't have anything to say".

 

[arlyn]

Must of in place of must have, I realize that this one is due, in large part, to the lazy way in which we speak.

 

[allroundthesun]

"Ignorant" when used incorrectly to mean "rude", "obnoxious", "jerk-ish" etc. As in, "Wow, I can't believe he insulted you, that was so ignorant." Nooooot what the word means. Drives me nuts.

 

[trouts mom]

Originally Posted by Arlyn

Irregardless.

Nothing gets on my nerves more quickly than this word, it is incorrect.

Call it nonstandard all you want, it's as grammatically incorrect as 'ain't'

This! So annoying!

Also in the same boat, it bugs me when people say expecially. There is no X in especially!

 

[trouts mom]

Originally Posted by allroundthesun

"Ignorant" when used incorrectly to mean "rude", "obnoxious", "jerk-ish" etc. As in, "Wow, I can't believe he insulted you, that was so ignorant." Nooooot what the word means. Drives me nuts.

Oh yeah this too. It bugs me when I same someone is ignorant about something (with regards to the real definition) and then people look at me like I have three heads because they don't get why I would use the term at that time.

 

[catlover19]

Originally Posted by MoochNNoodles

Seriously!? You just slammed 2 of my favorite TV people!

EVOO is just short hand for "Extra Virgin Olive Oil" and the woman uses enough of it; I'd EVOO it too.

Just a shorthand of the trade.

The thing that bugs me about Rachael Ray is she always says "EVOO Extra Virgin Olive Oil" I wish she would pick one or the other.

The word that bugs me the most is you'se. It is very common in the town I used to live in. Most of the people that would say you'se just made themselves sound uneducated.

 

[yosemite]

Originally Posted by allroundthesun

"Ignorant" when used incorrectly to mean "rude", "obnoxious", "jerk-ish" etc. As in, "Wow, I can't believe he insulted you, that was so ignorant." Nooooot what the word means. Drives me nuts.

Actually, the Oxford dictionary defines "ignorant" as also meaning "uncouth due to lack of knowledge" which would allow the use of this word to describe some forms of rudeness.

 

[Willowy]

I hate it when people use words they don't know the meanings of in order to sound more "educated". It just makes them sound dumber!

 

[GoldyCat]

Originally Posted by Willowy

I hate it when people use words they don't know the meanings of in order to sound more "educated". It just makes them sound dumber!

Decimate seems to be one of the most frequently misused words. It makes me want to knock people over the head with a dictionary.

 

[Draco]

I can't stand the use of "Ain't". and in the phrase: "I ain't got no..." How about.. "I do not have..."??

I also can't stand it when people use "meh" in online chat.

 

[essayons89]

Like some other stated I get more irritated by the use of poor grammar in writing than I do when words are spoken. That being said, I can't stand "y'all". As a sports fan the one phrase that really bugs me is "walk off", which is most frequently used in baseball to describe a game winning hit or home run. Whatever happened to just saying "game winning..."?

I also find text speak annoying. Perhaps that's just me getting old?

 

[krazy kat2]

The phrase "you know what I'm saying" makes me want to smack the person using.
"My bad" is even worse. It's like everything is going to be alright just because they said something stupid after they DID something that was really stupid.

 

[ldg]

This thread had me cracking up. I do understand how things can get under the skin... but I guess (that for the most part) I have rather thick skin?

This is an industry-specific problem, but one word SO many people seem to be using in discussion of the economy of late is "transitory." I've gotten to the point where if I hear it on the radio I turn it off; if I see it in a news story, I immediately move along.

And Mike? Check your dictionary(ies). "Dove" is also past tense of dive.

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

According to Merriam-Webster:

dived or dove; div·ing...

Dive, which was originally a weak verb, developed a past tense dove, probably by analogy with verbs like drive, drove. Dove exists in some British dialects and has become the standard past tense especially in speech in some parts of Canada. In the United States dived and dove are both widespread in speech as past tense and past participle, with dove less common than dived in the south Midland area, and dived less common than dove in the Northern and north Midland areas. In writing, the past tense dived is usual in British English and somewhat more common in American English. Dove seems relatively rare as a past participle in writing.

 

[allroundthesun]

Originally Posted by Yosemite

Actually, the Oxford dictionary defines "ignorant" as also meaning "uncouth due to lack of knowledge" which would allow the use of this word to describe some forms of rudeness.

Oh, certainly. I wasn't talking about the very few instances in which I've heard it used correctly to describe the source of one's poor manners to which you're referring, of course; I meant to provide context for the specific definition of "rude" I intended by adding a couple of synonyms, but I should have been more clear, you're correct.

 

[yosemite]

Originally Posted by LDG

This thread had me cracking up. I do understand how things can get under the skin... but I guess (that for the most part) I have rather thick skin?

This is an industry-specific problem, but one word SO many people seem to be using in discussion of the economy of late is "transitory." I've gotten to the point where if I hear it on the radio I turn it off; if I see it in a news story, I immediately move along.

And Mike? Check your dictionary(ies). "Dove" is also past tense of dive.

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

According to Merriam-Webster:

Being Canadian, I was taught that dove was the correct past tense for dive. I honestly had never seen "dived" used until my later years and assumed it was incorrect which apparently it is not.

 

[mrblanche]

Once again, "dove" is used as a past tense of "dive," but it is a secondary form. The dictionary, as I said, is descriptive, not prescriptive. It tells us what people are doing, not what the rules are.

But language changes. I can accept that. I've seen the stagnation something like the French Academy causes when it constricts a language and prevents development.

I just said to me it sounds ignorant and uneducated. I hear people use "thunk" for the past tense of "think." I imagine in 30 years, that might be acceptable.

In all honesty, while such things are annoying, they don't get under my skin anywhere near as much as people who use expressions to belittle other people and their beliefs. Grammar and orthography is one thing; name-calling is entirely different.

But that's a different discussion.

 

[yosemite]

Originally Posted by mrblanche

Once again, "dove" is used as a past tense of "dive," but it is a secondary form. The dictionary, as I said, is descriptive, not prescriptive. It tells us what people are doing, not what the rules are.

But language changes. I can accept that. I've seen the stagnation something like the French Academy causes when it constricts a language and prevents development.

I just said to me it sounds ignorant and uneducated. I hear people use "thunk" for the past tense of "think." I imagine in 30 years, that might be acceptable.

In all honesty, while such things are annoying, they don't get under my skin anywhere near as much as people who use expressions to belittle other people and their beliefs. Grammar and orthography is one thing; name-calling is entirely different.

But that's a different discussion.

I suppose it would depend on the age of the persons using the language whether it would indicate ingorance or lack of education. Those of us who are longer-in-the-tooth were taught to use what would/could be considered "secondary" forms and the new dictionaries would also probably concur with that usage for today's society.

Just as there are accepted new words today due to the computer age and advances in technology, there are new meanings to words we used years ago, i.e., fag was slang for cigarette to name just one.

 

[sk_pacer]

Originally Posted by mrblanche

Once again, "dove" is used as a past tense of "dive," but it is a secondary form. The dictionary, as I said, is descriptive, not prescriptive. It tells us what people are doing, not what the rules are.

The dived/dove controversy is also a great example of two countries divided by a common language. In The Queen's English (and, therefore, Canada's) dove is absolutely correct; dived is incorrect and used to be marked as a wrong answer when used as singular past tense: he/she dove, they dived. This also extends to spelling and a few other grammatical differences. Here, for example, we have a whole Saskatchewan vocabulary that would sound like gibberish to anyone else and in light of that, what is a bunnyhug?

 

[pookie-poo]

Being in the nursing profession, I constantly hear the word "orientating" used. I have no idea if it is correct grammar or not, but it really makes my skin crawl. When a person goes to orientation, are they being orientated or oriented? "I'm orientating the new nurse to the O.R." Really? I'd probably just orient her....But hey, that's just me.

The 'loose' instead of 'lose' thing irks me too. Awesome, absolutely, definitely, relatively, literally....All overused to pointlessness. Improper use of apostrophes makes me crazy too. I would rather hear or read the word "awakened" over the phrase "woken up" or "woke up." I thought of about 50 other things while I was typing, but they flitted through my brain so quickly that I couldn't type fast enough to remember them all!