Words/phrases I wish would go away

[Frugal Lizard]

Here’s a weird one: I’ve seen people write “bare with me” about 5 times in the last week. And what’s more, I have seen it spelled correctly exactly zero times in the same period.

Sigh...

Maybe they are all heading off to a nudist camp together?     ;-)

In February?

You've never met dedicated nudists?

thank you for the laugh out loud image

[teen persuasion]

Here’s a weird one: I’ve seen people write “bare with me” about 5 times in the last week. And what’s more, I have seen it spelled correctly exactly zero times in the same period.

Sigh...

Maybe they are all heading off to a nudist camp together?     ;-)

In February?

You've never met dedicated nudists?

thank you for the laugh out loud image

Hmm... Frugal Lizard, Ontario; GuitarStv, Ontario; RetiredAt63, Ontario; teen persuasion, just south of Lake Ontario...

[Need2Save]

I wish people would stop pretending that they are "gifting" me time when a conference call naturally ends earlier than the scheduled half hour or hour. 

"It looks like I can give you twenty minutes back in your day"...(you know because we finished discussing all topics 20 minutes before the original meeting invite 'end time').

Well, no, you aren't "giving me twenty minutes" really are you?  You heard some other beanhead say that on a call like 12 months ago and now you can't help yourself from saying it at the end of every friggin call you end that isn't a full 60 minutes! 

I'm sad to report that this is still happening almost daily!  Even more people are saying it since we are on a zoom-ride that won't end! Please tell your friends to stop doing this!

[Paul der Krake]

All of the words in this video:

https://twitter.com/yayalexisgay/status/1369346460911734784

[BlueHouse]

All of the words in this video:

https://twitter.com/yayalexisgay/status/1369346460911734784

I don't usually click all the links, but this one was worth it. 

[sui generis]

All of the words in this video:

https://twitter.com/yayalexisgay/status/1369346460911734784

I don't usually click all the links, but this one was worth it.

Can confirm. Just BARTing back from a park in SF with some friends I hadn't seen in forever and 85% of those phrases were used. One friend (only?) is a salesforce employee.

[Taran Wanderer]

That was totes my college experience. I’m glad I chose a different path.

[Dicey]

Dear Grammar friends,
I need your help, please. I am ordering an inscribed paver and would like to get your input. I'm open to better/different phrasing. The goal is to thank the unsung behind-the-scenes people in the theater. Limit is 23 characters per line, including spaces. I'm pretty sure you're the right folks to ask. Since it's likely to outlast me, I'd like to get it right.

"Thanks to everyone who
makes the magic happen!
John, Jane, and
Johnny Doe"

Specifically, should "Jane" be placed before "John" and should I use the Oxford Comma? I typically do, but I don't inscribe stuff very often. Your thoughts are appreciated.
Kind regards,
Dicey

ETA: LOL, the comma after "and" was actually a typo, so I've fixed it. Not only am I a lousy typist, I can't multi-task either. Off to read the rest of your input..

[dandarc]

comma after 'and' shouldn't be there regardless. I think this is a case where it doesn't matter with the Oxford comma - you're not referring to specific people with that - meaning is clear (I think) to me. Unless you're just using "John Doe" as a placeholder on this forum - I read that as this stone is actually going to say "John, Jane and Johnny Doe"?

I kind of like the way it sounds with the words in the order you've presented. So I've got:

"Thanks to everyone who
makes the magic happen!
John, Jane, and
Johnny Doe"

and consider the the comma after Jane optional.

[shelivesthedream]

If you mean John Doe, Jane Doe and Johnny Doe:
"Thanks to everyone who
makes the magic happen!
John, Jane and
Johnny Doe"

If you mean John Smith, Jane Green and Johnny Doe:

"Thanks to everyone who
makes the magic happen!
John, Jane, and
Johnny Doe"

Fixed your comma issue. In the absence of other factors, I would typically give names alphabetically. If it's a family (i.e. the Doe family), I would typically do Husband, Wife and Children-in-order-of-age. But if it's a family then the family members themselves can pick the order.

[dandarc]

I read that where "John Doe" is a placeholder for "unidentified individual". That's common parlance in the US anyway - often seen in a crime drama, John or Jane Doe is an unidentified victim. If I'm correct on that then these are not real people - just a more clever way to thank "all the people working at this theatre, before, now and forever, who
you've never seen on the stage"

But maybe I'm misreading the OP this and it is 3 real people?

[Dicey]

I read that where "John Doe" is a placeholder for "unidentified individual". That's common parlance in the US anyway - often seen in a crime drama, John or Jane Doe is an unidentified victim. If I'm correct on that then these are not real people - just a more clever way to thank "all the people working at this theatre, before, now and forever, who
you've never seen on the stage"

But maybe I'm misreading the OP this and it is 3 real people?

Those are not our real names, lol. If it matters, it's Dad, Stepmom and Stepson, all with the same last name. Last I checked, we are all three real people. Though I think the anonymous angle is brilliant, I am not so clever. I have a boring reason for using our real names that's too identifying to divulge.

[shelivesthedream]

I read that where "John Doe" is a placeholder for "unidentified individual". That's common parlance in the US anyway - often seen in a crime drama, John or Jane Doe is an unidentified victim. If I'm correct on that then these are not real people - just a more clever way to thank "all the people working at this theatre, before, now and forever, who
you've never seen on the stage"

But maybe I'm misreading the OP this and it is 3 real people?

You are misreading it. John, Jane and Johnny Doe are doing the thanking, not being thanked.

[Dicey]

More ideas. I'll leave the signatures out to avoid confusion.

"Thanks for making the magic happen!"

"The magic happens because of you."

"You make the magic happen!"

I think what theater people do is alchemy, so it's magic to me. Therefore making the magic happen is the idea I want to convey.

All suggestions welcome!

[Morning Glory]

More ideas. I'll leave the signatures out to avoid confusion.

"Thanks for making the magic happen!"

"The magic happens because of you."

"You make the magic happen!"

I think what theater people do is alchemy, so it's magic to me. Therefore making the magic happen is the idea I want to convey.

All suggestions welcome!

But then it won't be a haiku

[SunnyDays]

I would not include the names within the quotation marks, because you are the people saying something, but the names are not part of what you’re saying.

[Dicey]

I would not include the names within the quotation marks, because you are the people saying something, but the names are not part of what you’re saying.

The quotation marks are only to show that each of these is a stand alone option. There will be no quotation marks on the final inscription.

Thanks to you folks, I think I have the name part worked out, so I didn't repeat it with each option. I'm still open to suggestions.

@Morning Glory - haha on the Haiku. Have you seen "Yes Day"?

[BicycleB]

I would not include the names within the quotation marks, because you are the people saying something, but the names are not part of what you’re saying.

The quotation marks are only to show that each of these is a stand alone option. There will be no quotation marks on the final inscription.

Thanks to you folks, I think I have the name part worked out, so I didn't repeat it with each option. I'm still open to suggestions.

@Morning Glory - haha on the Haiku. Have you seen "Yes Day"?

Thanks to all of you for making the magic happen!

(original wording could be read as though only some of them make magic, and you are thanking only those people. I can imagine being a depressed backstage person and feeling excluded.)

[Morning Glory]

I would not include the names within the quotation marks, because you are the people saying something, but the names are not part of what you’re saying.

The quotation marks are only to show that each of these is a stand alone option. There will be no quotation marks on the final inscription.

Thanks to you folks, I think I have the name part worked out, so I didn't repeat it with each option. I'm still open to suggestions.

@Morning Glory - haha on the Haiku. Have you seen "Yes Day"?

No  I just googled it, it looks cute

[RetiredAt63]

New one.  I someone write about people crossing the boarder.  They may be making someone who boards (i.e. pays rent) angry, but I think they meant border.

Late edit.  "I saw someone"  not "I someone". Darn tablet, I have trouble proof-reading on it.  This got quoted, my bad grammar lives forever!  ;-(

[merula]

Seen on this very forum, a brand new homophone error! (At least I've never seen it before.) Ecru vs Accrue.

"...you continue to ecru reward points..."

Maybe it's a text-to-speech error?

[RetiredAt63]

Seen on this very forum, a brand new homophone error! (At least I've never seen it before.) Ecru vs Accrue.

"...you continue to ecru reward points..."

Maybe it's a text-to-speech error?

Most people never use the term "ecru" so I'm a bit surprised to see this.

[Metalcat]

Seen on this very forum, a brand new homophone error! (At least I've never seen it before.) Ecru vs Accrue.

"...you continue to ecru reward points..."

Maybe it's a text-to-speech error?

Most people never use the term "ecru" so I'm a bit surprised to see this.

Sure, but it might be that they tried to spell "accrue" starting with an "e" and have it autocorrect to ecru

[Taran Wanderer]

I recently saw an editorial in our small town online news source talking about people of certain dissent... as in descent. Does anyone proofread anymore?

[nereo]

I recently saw an editorial in our small town online news source talking about people of certain dissent... as in descent. Does anyone proofread anymore?

Knope.

[Kris]

I recently saw an editorial in our small town online news source talking about people of certain dissent... as in descent. Does anyone proofread anymore?

I have been seeing “decent” instead of “descent” a fair amount lately.

[Taran Wanderer]

I recently saw an editorial in our small town online news source talking about people of certain dissent... as in descent. Does anyone proofread anymore?

Knope.

Okay, Lesley!

[John Galt incarnate!]

I have been seeing “decent” instead of “descent” a fair amount lately.

Oh my!

[John Galt incarnate!]

New one.  I someone write about people crossing the boarder.

I've seen this error a few times.

 They may be making someone who boards (i.e. pays rent) angry, but I think they meant border.

So do I.

[Travis]

Not a "word," but that wave that drivers do when you're nice to them more often is used by someone who just tried to kill me.  It's supposed to mean "thank you for giving me room/parking space/letting me go first." Yesterday on my bike I got the wave from a cab driver doing a U turn in the middle of the street right in front of me. If I hadn't braked you would have hit me head-on so, um, you're welcome?

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

The wave also means "sorry, thanks for not honking at me or crashing into me."

[SunnyDays]

Here's a few I hear all the time:  fermiliar, yer, fer and vunerable.

[Tigerpine]

While this is technically off-topic, I don't know where else to post it.

Today I saw on the forum the word "squick" for the first time.  Apparently it's a way one feels about something that is wrong or unjust.  Is that correct?  What does this word mean?  Is a regional word?  Generational?  It's completely new to me.

[Dollar Slice]

Today I saw on the forum the word "squick" for the first time.  Apparently it's a way one feels about something that is wrong or unjust.  Is that correct?  What does this word mean?  Is a regional word?  Generational?  It's completely new to me.

This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.

It's not 'wrong or unjust,' though, it's not a moral or judgmental thing. It's more like... disgusting, revolting, gross, repulsive. When something is so gross that you don't even want to look at it, or you shudder just thinking about it, or you want to plug your ears rather than listen to it, you would say that "squicks me out."

[Tigerpine]

This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.

It's not 'wrong or unjust,' though, it's not a moral or judgmental thing. It's more like... disgusting, revolting, gross, repulsive. When something is so gross that you don't even want to look at it, or you shudder just thinking about it, or you want to plug your ears rather than listen to it, you would say that "squicks me out."

Thanks!  And that explains why I didn't know that one.  15 years ago I was overseas.

[Morning Glory]

This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.

It's not 'wrong or unjust,' though, it's not a moral or judgmental thing. It's more like... disgusting, revolting, gross, repulsive. When something is so gross that you don't even want to look at it, or you shudder just thinking about it, or you want to plug your ears rather than listen to it, you would say that "squicks me out."

Thanks!  And that explains why I didn't know that one.  15 years ago I was overseas.

I've never heard that one either.

[Metalcat]

While this is technically off-topic, I don't know where else to post it.

Today I saw on the forum the word "squick" for the first time.  Apparently it's a way one feels about something that is wrong or unjust.  Is that correct?  What does this word mean?  Is a regional word?  Generational?  It's completely new to me.

A quick google will tell you that it was popularized in online communities at least 20 years ago, so geography wouldn't matter, nor would generation really, since all sorts of ages participate in online communities.

Apparently, it's thought to have it's genesis in 90s online BDSM groups, as a way to express personal discomfort with an idea without moral judgement of the act.

[GreenSheep]

Recipe writers (food bloggers) seem to have decided that "put" is a bad word. They're always writing "add the first three ingredients to a bowl" or "add the onion to a skillet" or "add the cookie dough to the pan in 2" balls." I've even seen "add the skillet to the stove on medium-high." What's wrong with "put the ingredients in a bowl," for heaven's sake?! Do they think it sounds too "commanding," like yoga teachers who always add "-ing" to every instruction? "And now, putting our feet over our shoulders, keeping our hands on the floor..."

Also, I may have said this before, but food bloggers seem to think every single ingredient requires an adjective, and they're often not very creative. "This recipe is made with sweet maple syrup, citrusy lime, crunchy graham crackers, and creamy milk." Argh.

[Travis]

Recipe writers (food bloggers) seem to have decided that "put" is a bad word. They're always writing "add the first three ingredients to a bowl" or "add the onion to a skillet" or "add the cookie dough to the pan in 2" balls." I've even seen "add the skillet to the stove on medium-high." What's wrong with "put the ingredients in a bowl," for heaven's sake?! Do they think it sounds too "commanding," like yoga teachers who always add "-ing" to every instruction? "And now, putting our feet over our shoulders, keeping our hands on the floor..."

Also, I may have said this before, but food bloggers seem to think every single ingredient requires an adjective, and they're often not very creative. "This recipe is made with sweet maple syrup, citrusy lime, crunchy graham crackers, and creamy milk." Argh.

Too simple for what they take as an art form or a complex operation. Depending on the recipe, "dump" would be just as appropriate a word, but you'll never see that on a blog or cooking show.

[RetiredAt63]

Recipe writers (food bloggers) seem to have decided that "put" is a bad word. They're always writing "add the first three ingredients to a bowl" or "add the onion to a skillet" or "add the cookie dough to the pan in 2" balls." I've even seen "add the skillet to the stove on medium-high." What's wrong with "put the ingredients in a bowl," for heaven's sake?! Do they think it sounds too "commanding," like yoga teachers who always add "-ing" to every instruction? "And now, putting our feet over our shoulders, keeping our hands on the floor..."

Also, I may have said this before, but food bloggers seem to think every single ingredient requires an adjective, and they're often not very creative. "This recipe is made with sweet maple syrup, citrusy lime, crunchy graham crackers, and creamy milk." Argh.

Too simple for what they take as an art form or a complex operation. Depending on the recipe, "dump" would be just as appropriate a word, but you'll never see that on a blog or cooking show.

Well they want to utilize fancy words instead of using basic ones.    /s

[Morning Glory]

Recipe writers (food bloggers) seem to have decided that "put" is a bad word. They're always writing "add the first three ingredients to a bowl" or "add the onion to a skillet" or "add the cookie dough to the pan in 2" balls." I've even seen "add the skillet to the stove on medium-high." What's wrong with "put the ingredients in a bowl," for heaven's sake?! Do they think it sounds too "commanding," like yoga teachers who always add "-ing" to every instruction? "And now, putting our feet over our shoulders, keeping our hands on the floor..."

Also, I may have said this before, but food bloggers seem to think every single ingredient requires an adjective, and they're often not very creative. "This recipe is made with sweet maple syrup, citrusy lime, crunchy graham crackers, and creamy milk." Argh.

Too simple for what they take as an art form or a complex operation. Depending on the recipe, "dump" would be just as appropriate a word, but you'll never see that on a blog or cooking show.

Well they want to utilize fancy words instead of using basic ones.    /s

I've seen "dump cakes" on cooking blogs and pinterest before" .  And the first ingredient should be put, placed, or poured into the bowl (unless it's eggs, they are cracked), before the others are added. Adding something to nothing makes no sense.

I really really hate "creamy" as an adjective.  It makes me gag a little.

[Metalcat]

Recipe writers (food bloggers) seem to have decided that "put" is a bad word. They're always writing "add the first three ingredients to a bowl" or "add the onion to a skillet" or "add the cookie dough to the pan in 2" balls." I've even seen "add the skillet to the stove on medium-high." What's wrong with "put the ingredients in a bowl," for heaven's sake?! Do they think it sounds too "commanding," like yoga teachers who always add "-ing" to every instruction? "And now, putting our feet over our shoulders, keeping our hands on the floor..."

Also, I may have said this before, but food bloggers seem to think every single ingredient requires an adjective, and they're often not very creative. "This recipe is made with sweet maple syrup, citrusy lime, crunchy graham crackers, and creamy milk." Argh.

Too simple for what they take as an art form or a complex operation. Depending on the recipe, "dump" would be just as appropriate a word, but you'll never see that on a blog or cooking show.

"Fold in the cheese"

[John Galt incarnate!]

This is a really old one, 15 years minimum.

It's not 'wrong or unjust,' though, it's not a moral or judgmental thing. It's more like... disgusting, revolting, gross, repulsive. When something is so gross that you don't even want to look at it, or you shudder just thinking about it, or you want to plug your ears rather than listen to it, you would say that "squicks me out."

Thanks!  And that explains why I didn't know that one.  15 years ago I was overseas.

I've never heard that one either.

+1

[Dee]

People are not only no longer "putting" things in bowls or other cooking vessels, but (more annoyingly) have stopped "eating" various things in favour of "do-ing" these foods, as in, "what kind of burrito do you want?" answered by "I'll do chicken" or "I can't remember if you do meat or if you're a vegetarian?" answered by "no, I don't do meat" etc. (I mean, I guess it's no worse than if we all started putting food in our mouths instead of adding it there?)

[GreenSheep]

People are not only no longer "putting" things in bowls or other cooking vessels, but (more annoyingly) have stopped "eating" various things in favour of "do-ing" these foods, as in, "what kind of burrito do you want?" answered by "I'll do chicken" or "I can't remember if you do meat or if you're a vegetarian?" answered by "no, I don't do meat" etc. (I mean, I guess it's no worse than if we all started putting food in our mouths instead of adding it there?)

Haha, I love it! The last line of every recipe is going to be, "Add the food to your mouth and enjoy!" before we know it...!

[Morning Glory]

People are not only no longer "putting" things in bowls or other cooking vessels, but (more annoyingly) have stopped "eating" various things in favour of "do-ing" these foods, as in, "what kind of burrito do you want?" answered by "I'll do chicken" or "I can't remember if you do meat or if you're a vegetarian?" answered by "no, I don't do meat" etc. (I mean, I guess it's no worse than if we all started putting food in our mouths instead of adding it there?)

I've only heard this on Canadian TV shows. Picturing the mom on Schitts Creek right now 😁

[Dee]

I've heard it in restaurants on many occasions in the last few years. In Canada. (Ottawa more specifically.) I have no idea how regional this phrasing is.

[GreenSheep]

I've heard it in restaurants on many occasions in the last few years. In Canada. (Ottawa more specifically.) I have no idea how regional this phrasing is.

I've heard it in several states in the US, so I don't think it's just a regional thing.

[merula]

"Fold in the cheese"

"You just fold it in!"

[teen persuasion]

Just saw this on Bogleheads: "ignore the neigh-sayers".